There’s a widespread belief that electricity generated from large dams is both clean (carbon-free) and inexpensive. However, this perception is far from reality. Not only do these dams have a significant environmental impact, but their associated carbon footprint also challenges their “clean” label. Moreover, the electricity produced often turns out to be very expensive, especially after factoring in the interest on loans typically borrowed from International Financial Institutions to finance their construction. Take the Neelum Jhelum Hydroelectric Project as an example. In 2007, the initial feasibility study estimated the cost at $945 million. Yet, after a prolonged period of ten years, the final cost ballooned to $32.32 billion. This figure includes not only construction expenses but also interest on loans, environmental damage and seismic risks in the area. A research report by renowned hydrologist Dr. Hassan Abbas, according to the report “The True Cost of Hydropower from Tarbela & Neelum-Jhelum”, if the Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Project operates for its intended 30-year lifespan, the cost of producing one unit of electricity will be Rs. 50.55. In this regard, Dr. Hassan Abbas also pointed out an important issue , he said “it is important to note that the project has been halted since last year due to technical issues, which have further escalated its overall costs.” Similarly, the Tarbela Dam, constructed in 1976, was one of Pakistan’s major dam projects, financed with a principal loan from the World Bank. Its estimated cost, including the carbon footprint, basic construction expenses, and the environmental impact of blocking nutrient-rich silt from reaching the delta, amounts to $351.91 billion. This silt, once carried by the river from the mountains, played a key role in enriching the delta’s soil. Although these environmental losses were not initially factored in, the reality is that the cost of electricity from the Tarbela Dam now stands at Rs. 53.61 per unit, which is far from economical. According to Dr. Abbas, the water stored in the Tarbela Dam reduces two million-acre feet of water in Punjab and Sindh in summer, while providing additional two million-acre feet of water to Sindh and Punjab in winter. Since summer crops are more expensive, the summer loss outweighs the winter gain and the overall loss is due to this water storage. It should also be kept in mind here that our canal system as a whole runs at 104 million-acre feet annually; of which Tarbela’s share is only 2 million acre feet. In any case, we cannot name this reservoir of water in Tarbela as the “backbone” of irrigation. The Overlooked Negative Effects of Large Dams: Forced Eviction The construction of the Tarbela Dam, completed in 1976, led to the forced eviction of over 96,000 people and the destruction of 135 villages. While the majority of those displaced were resettled in five township schemes, it is a troubling fact that even after six decades, many have yet to receive alternative land. A significant judicial ruling came in January 2022, when the Supreme Court upheld the Peshawar High Court’s decision mandating the provision of alternative land and compensation to those affected by the dam’s construction. The court directed the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) to compensate the victims. In his remarks, Justice Umar Atta Bandial acknowledged that, despite official policy, many victims of the Tarbela Dam had not received the promised alternative land. He urged WAPDA to take action in addressing this longstanding issue. While the process of relocating people from their homes to new locations may seem straightforward on paper, in reality, it is far more complex and challenging. This sensitive process goes beyond engineering and housing logistics; it deeply affects the emotional and psychological well-being of those displaced, while also disrupting their culture and traditions. Moreover, state institutions often lack the capacity to adequately accommodate all the displaced individuals. As a result, even the third generation of Tarbela Dam victims continues to face ongoing struggles, navigating endless rounds of court cases and government offices in pursuit of alternative land and compensation. Umar Khan Bacha, one of the victims of the Tarbela Dam, reflects on the enduring struggle: “What more is left to say after sixty years? It’s simple—the land and political mafias are in control, while the poor continue to suffer. Many families of the displaced have either left the country or relocated to Karachi. The lands we were given were barren and uninhabitable, forcing most victims to sell them at very low prices because they were of no use.” Environmental expert Naseer Memon highlights that while some people displaced directly from the dam site received limited compensation as dam victims, the wider impacts of these dams are largely ignored. Those affected by the degradation of the Indus delta, or who lost their livelihoods and were forced to migrate, are neither recognized as dam victims nor considered for any compensation. Naseer also points out that while a resettlement policy exists, its implementation remains a major concern. Effects on the environment: Carbon Footprint A study by Scherer and Pfister (2016) examined 1,473 major dams worldwide, including the Tarbela Dam, and found that the production of 1 megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity generates approximately 265.68 kg of carbon dioxide. If Tarbela generates 534 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity, it contributes an astounding 142 million tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Flood Prevention Climate change has altered rainfall patterns, resulting in heavy downpours over short periods, which pose a significant threat to dam structures. According to Dr. Hassan Abbas, an alarming reality is that these dams can sometimes exacerbate flooding. When water levels exceed safe limits, the dam’s gates are opened to protect its integrity. While Clause 20.1.4 of Pakistan’s Water Policy emphasizes the protection of hydraulic structures at all costs, Article 9 of the Constitution of Pakistan mandates the protection of citizens’ lives and property. Unfortunately, government priorities often favor safeguarding the dam over protecting the populace. Dr. Abbas recounts a tragic incident from the 1992 floods when the Mangla Dam reached maximum capacity by September. As more water flowed into the rivers, the government opened the dam’s gates to prevent structural failure, resulting in the submersion of the city of Jhelum and the loss of 1,000 lives. A WAPDA report published in 1994 regarding these floods clearly stated that Mangla Dam lacked effective flood control measures. Another devastating event occurred in 2005 when heavy rains caused the Shadi Kaur Dam in Balochistan to collapse, washing away 250 fishermen from a nearby village while they slept. Tragically, this disaster is largely forgotten today. Despite claims that large dams prevent floods by storing floodwaters, no dam can effectively perform both functions simultaneously. As soon as monsoon rains cause river levels to rise, the dam stores the water without awaiting subsequent rainfall, meaning it cannot remain empty in anticipation of a flood. Thus, the notion that dams can control flooding is fundamentally flawed. Seismic Risk Large dams are typically constructed in the upper reaches of the Indus River, where the tectonic plates of three major mountain ranges converge, resulting in a heightened risk of earthquakes. Recent examples, such as the Attabad landslide in 2010 and the earthquake in 2005, illustrate this danger. Moreover, dams and lakes located in mountainous regions can generate massive tsunamis due to landslides. A single landslide akin to the Attabad incident could unleash catastrophic destruction, yet this seismic risk is rarely factored into the cost of dam construction. Negative effects on biodiversity The construction of dams disrupts the flow of water in rivers and the essential minerals that rivers carry from the mountains along with their sediment. Dams create barriers that impede these vital elements for both fertile riverine and marine life. For instance, according to a WWF report, the Palla fish (Hilsa shad), a notable species of the Arabian Sea that used to migrate to the Indus Delta during the monsoon season, accounted for 70% of the fish caught in the delta, compared to barely 15% now. Additionally, the Indus blind dolphin, once found throughout the entire Indus River, is now confined to a limited range between Gudu and Taunsa due to dam construction. The damage caused by large dams should also encompass the loss of biodiversity, which is unfortunately often overlooked. The loss of Delta After the construction of dams in the upper reaches of the river, not only did the freshwater reaching the delta decrease, but so did the fertile soil carried by the river. This soil, when combined with river water, expanded and formed new land. According to the British Gazette, by 1873, the sediment brought by river water had created approximately 97 square miles of new land in the delta. However, due to the large structures built upstream, water flow diminished, allowing seawater to encroach upon the fertile land of the delta. Research by Hasan Abbas indicates that high-value crops like rice and bananas were once cultivated on these delta lands. If the value of an acre was estimated at Rs. 10 million, we can comprehend the significant losses incurred due to the delta’s degradation. In addition to the loss of crops, the port and city of Keti Bandar were also devastated, including its rice mills, which have now disappeared. Furthermore, the negative impacts of dam construction include population migration, loss of roads and a decline in housing values. According to Hussain Jarwar, the CEO of Indus Consortium, “international financial institutions, particularly the World Bank, are providing both technical and financial support for the construction of dams. Currently, the World Bank is backing several projects, including the Dasu Dam Stage One Project, Second Additional Financing for the Dasu Project, Tarbela Hydropower and various Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Hydropower Projects. This financing is projected to increase the share of hydropower in electricity generation from 40 to 54% in the future. However, the World Bank has not engaged with local communities regarding the environmental and social consequences in the Indus Delta, a practice that undermines the bank’s own environmental and social safeguards. In Annex-4 of the “Pakistan Affordable and Clean Energy Programme,” the World Bank acknowledges that ecosystems may be adversely affected by additional hydro projects. Furthermore, the World Bank’s financing for hydropower is actually hindering the growth of wind and solar energy, obstructing Pakistan’s progress toward its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) target, which is not aligned with the Paris Agreement.” Natural Sources Massive loans are secured from international institutions for constructing of large dams or structures on rivers, which become a significant burden on the country’s economy due to compounding interest. Moreover, these extensive structures have devastated the entire riverine ecosystem, resulting in substantial environmental and economic losses. As we move into the third decade of the 21st century, it is important to recognize that these dams represent 19th century technology. Today, we have access to innovative, cost-effective and nature-based solutions, such as solar and wind alternatives, which can provide debt relief while also enhancing river ecosystems. The flowing water of the river can serve as a new lifeline for the Indus Delta.