Idukki Dam

Blunder 999

Kerala is trapped by its promise to host Tamil Nadu’s Mullaperiyar dam for a millennium

By M Suchitra, Bharat Lal Seth
Last Updated: Wednesday 19 September 2018

idukki dam and mullaperiyar dam

In the past month, the decades-old controversy surrounding the safety of the century-old Mullaperiyar dam in Kerala reached fever pitch. People living downstream fear it can collapse any moment. There have been strikes, fasts, burning of vehicles, deployment of police forces, high-pitched news presentations and even banning of a film, the title of which candidly referred to the row. As protests mount and panic grips people, a confidential survey report, which has been leaked to the media, says the dam has been damaged to the extent that no amount of rectification can salvage it from causing a disaster. 

Kerala says it wants to build a new dam, decommissioning the ageing one. But Tamil Nadu, which is the sole beneficiary of the dam, insists that the 116-year-old dam is still robust. To sort out the feud, a Supreme Court-appointed empowered committee is assessing the safety of the dam, located in Idukki district, bordering Tamil Nadu. It is also studying Kerala’s proposal for a new dam. The committee is expected to submit its report to the apex court in February next year.

Kerala bears Tamil Nadu’s cross

The dam is on the Periyar River, which originates in the Western Ghats of Kerala and flows across the state to join the Arabian Sea. It was built in 1895 by Madras State, now Tamil Nadu, under the British rule. The British government had struck a lease agreement with the princely state of Travancore, now part of Kerala, to lease around 3,500 hectares (ha) to Madras and grant it all rights over the reservoir water for irrigation for 999 years. Since then, Tamil Nadu has been controlling and managing the dam and diverting the reservoir water for irrigating its drought-prone Madurai, Theni, Sivaganga, Ramanathapuram and Dindigul districts. Every year, on an average, the state diverts 606.83 million cubic metres of water to irrigate around 70,000 ha. It also uses the water to produce 140 MW power.

The two states were cordial until 1979 when the dam developed cracks and started leaking, raising doubts about its safety. The dam was over 80 years old then.

The Central Water Commission visited the dam and recommended lowering the maximum water level in the reservoir to 41.45 metres and carry out strengthening works. Tamil Nadu spent Rs 26 crore on strengthening the dam by constructing a 10-metre-wide concrete backing and on other safety repairs.

A V George, professor of geology and environment at Christ College in Irinjalakkuda, says these repair and construction works have further weakened the structure. Safety concerns heightened instead of dying down.

Panic erupted in November after recurring tremors of the magnitude of up to 3.8 on the Richter Scale hit the dam’s downstream areas; as many as 26 tremors have hit the region in the past eight months. The region also received heavy rain. Water level in the reservoir crossed 136 feet (41.45 m), the permissible level fixed by the Kerala Dam Safety Authority.

Amid fears about an imminent dam collapse, Kerala urged Tamil Nadu to reduce the water level to 120 feet (36.5 m). It refused and wanted to raise the water level to 142 feet (43.28 m), as allowed by the apex court in 2006.

Ageing and vulnerable

The dam, 365.7 metres long and 53.6 metres high, is one of the oldest in the world, well past the 50-year period during which most dams are deemed safe.

Its walls are covered with rubble masonry to protect the core from high water pressure. The core is built with hydraulic lime and surkhi, a mixture of crushed bricks, sand and sugar. This makes it the only dam of its kind in the world, making it difficult to assess the strength of the structure, says the confidential report by M Sashidharan, former chief engineer with the Kerala State Electricity Board. He was Kerala’s observer during a survey of the dam early this year by the Centre for Soil and Materials Research Station, New Delhi. The institute scanned the dam using a remote operated vehicle, which revealed the extent of deterioration the dam has undergone. There are numerous pot holes, crevices and openings on the surface of the dam. The masonry cover has been severely damaged between the depth of 32 m and 29 m throughout the length of the dam.

Several studies have found similar flaws in the ageing dam. Mullaperiyar is a traditional gravity dam, the strength of which depends on its weight. George of Christ College says over the years, about 40 per cent of the lime from the core has leaked out, making it much weaker. Cracks, leaks and seepages have made the structure damp and wet, he adds.

Further, the dam falls in quake-prone area. Between December 2000 and January 2001, the region was hit by tremors of magnitude of up to 5. The Geological Survey of India places Kerala in Zone III, where quakes with magnitude up to 6.5 can happen. A study by the Centre For Earth Sciences at Thiruvananthapuram, in 2001, and a 2009 report submitted to the Kerala government by IIT- Roorkee say the dam cannot withstand quakes of magnitude of six and above. IIT-Roorkee researchers found 22 active faults in the area surrounding the dam. Besides, if one considers the maximum rainfall the region receives, the dam is hydrologically unsafe, says A K Gosain, professor at IIT-Delhi, who has studied the dam for its safety concerns.

What if the dam collapses?

Will 3.5 million people in five central Kerala districts be affected as the Kerala government claims? What could be the course of flash floods?

No one knows correctly, not even Kerala. It has not done a dam break analysis or potential loss mapping, even after establishing a dam safety authority and Mullaperiyar Special Cell in 2006. Only after panic mounted last month, that it asked IIT-Roorkee on November 30 to conduct a dam break analysis and submit the report within six months.

Analysts say a huge disaster can occur if the dam bursts.

mullaperiyar dam

There are four gram panchayats and a few small towns like Vanditeperiyar between Mullaperiyar dam and Idukki dam, Asia’s biggest arch dam, 36 km down the Periyar. James Wilson, an engineer with the Kerala State Electricity Board and member of Mullaperiyar Special Cell, says if the dam bursts, the flash flood will reach Idukki reservoir within 45 minutes, washing away parts of these villages and towns between these dams and affecting about 70,000 people living there.

The Idukki dam has a storage capacity of 2,000 million cubic metres (MCM) and can hold the flood water from Mullaperiyar dam, but not if its water level is high. On four previous occasions, the water of both the reservoirs have been full to the brim. The situation would be disastrous if the Mullaperiyar dam fails during the monsoon. “Considering the steep topography of the region and the elevated position of the dam, the Rs velocity of the flash flood will be very high,” says Wilson. The high-velocity flash flood would bring down much soil and floating debris, which can clog spillways and exert considerable pressure on the Idukki dam and two adjacent dams, which together form the Idukki reservoir. If they fail to contain the water load, all the nine dams downstream across the Periyar will get breached and the flash flood will run through four central Kerala districts and the port city of Kochi, affecting over three million people, before it merges with the Arabian Sea, he adds.

“The government is extremely worried about the safety of its people,” says Kerala’s water resources minister P J Joseph. “We want a new dam for ensuring the security of our people as well as facilitating continued water supply to Tamil Nadu as it is being given now.” The Kerala legislative assembly passed a resolution in July 2009 for the construction of a new dam at an estimated cost of Rs 600 crore. The state’s stand is “safety for Kerala, and water for Tamil Nadu”.

But Tamil Nadu is not ready to buy this argument. It very well knows if a new dam is built, it will have to sign a new agreement. And in that case, the state will lose the custodianship of the dam and the 3,400 ha on which the project stands. It is apprehensive that the new dam will no longer be operated and managed by their engineers. Further, the state might have to pay Kerala a reasonably good sum for water and the power it produces using Kerala’s water.

Kerala could have opted out of the original agreement of 1886 during the reorganisation of the states in 1956. It did not. Instead, it entered into two supplementary agreements with Tamil Nadu in 1970. The first one helped it acquire fishing rights in the dam and the second allowed it to revise the lease rent from Rs 5 to Rs 30 an acre (0.4 ha) and revise the lease amount once in 30 years. The agreements allowed Tamil Nadu to generate electricity using the diverted waters, which was not there in the original agreement. Tamil Nadu now pays just Rs 8.9 lakh a year as lease amount for the land and the royalty for power.

The renewal of the 1886 agreement for 999 years, whether an act of magnanimity or a blunder, is now a potential worry for Kerala. Over the years, Kerala’s water needs have increased and it is incurring big losses by diverting the Mullaperiyar water to Tamil Nadu. Its Idukki hydel project generates 41.64 million units, worth around Rs 50 crore. By saving the water it diverts to Tamil Nadu every year, Kerala can easily generate power worth Rs 1,000 crore. Kerala, however, has submitted an undertaking to the Centre that it would continue to provide water to Tamil Nadu as is being given now, if a new dam is constructed.

But dams are not for ever

Dam as a permanent structure is a false conception. Bharat Jhunjhunwala, an economist who has researched the dismantling of dams in the US, says decommissioning of a dam has serveral consequences. So the cost of decommissioning and, in cases like Kerala, building new dams and the new site required to dump the debris must be factored in the impact assessment at the time of commissioning a dam. But this does not happen in India, he adds.


If Kerala’s slogan, “safety for Kerala, water for Tamil Nadu” is sincere, why should it build another dam spending its own funds, that too, in an ecologically sensitive, tremor-prone region? The new dam will submerge 50.5 ha of Periyar wildlife sanctuary.

Kerala should not take the responsibility of storing water for its neighbouring state, putting in danger thousands of lives on its own turf, says A Latha of the River Research Centre at Chalakudy, Kerala.

A possible sustainable option could be immediate reduction in storage level at the dam so as to reduce water pressure on the weak structure. The level can be reduced to 36.5 metres initially as requested by Kerala and then to 33.5 metres. Simultaneously, Kerala can consider the possibility of constructing check dams instead of a new dam and Tamil Nadu can build more tanks to increase its storage facility. This will provide better water security to Tamil Nadu farmers. Those in command area of each tank will be aware of the quantum of water available to them and can plan farming accordingly, she adds.

K J Joy of The Forum for Policy Dialogue on Water Conflicts in India says a study should be done to asses the water needs to the service area and the long term averages of water use. Once it is done, water from the Mullaperiyar reservoir can be diverted to Tamil Nadu during the monsoon and stored in the existing or new storage facilities there, he says.

Whether there should be a new dam or the existing dam is safe to store water for some more time can then be dispassionately assessed by independent experts, Joy suggests.

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter :

Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.

  • Dear Bro, It is clearly

    Dear Bro,
    It is clearly understandable neither of the state can be successful without each other. Safety is the necessary need which has been understood by all. Please watch the below video.

    New Dam can't be constructed with benefit of both the states

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Tamil Nadu is a state, which

    Tamil Nadu is a state, which unfortunately has to depend on its neighboring states for water. Already the Cauvery delta farmers got affected due to untimely release of water, forcing the farmers for a single season cultivation.
    There is no reason to believe that Kerala will keep up its promise of supplying water to TN through the proposed new dam.
    India as a single nation has to be unbiased in its approach. Nationalization of rivers and dams is the only solution ahead.
    The article is biased in representing only the views of Kerala and not of the counter arguments placed by Tamil Nadu. Every coin as both sides The pros and cons should be analyzed without coming to a hasty judgement

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Kerala has been divinely

    Kerala has been divinely following an unusual agreement with TN and giving water to it. It didn't even ask to cancel the agreement during the state reformations.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • First let me quote a relevant

    First let me quote a relevant portion of a mail received from IIT Roorkee.

    ÔÇ£The development of tensile stresses at heal under MCE condition for normal reservoir level suggest the tensile stresses exceeding the ultimate tensile stress of Random Rubble Masonry will show up damage and not failure. Damage do not mean failure of dam but may lead to failure in certain cases. The technical report submitted to Kerala Government nowhere mentions of failure of dam.ÔÇØ

    IIT Roorkee has run a finite element analysis to check the stability. They consider an EQ of magnitude more than 6 in Richter scale, Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) 0.21g for 2% exceedance in 50 years. They vaguely state that ÔÇ£there has been many EQ of magnitude 6 in the past in the regionÔÇØ.
    It is not sure what compressive stress and tensile stress they considered for checking the design.
    Even though they state that they have not anticipated failure and only cracks, I have apprehension about the analysis.
    The gravity method of design assumes that that the dam is a two dimensional rigid block. The foundation pressure distribution is assumed to be linear. It is generally prudent to perform a gravity analysis before doing more rigorous studies and analysis. In most cases if a gravity analysis indicates that the dam is stable, then no further analysis is needed to be done.
    ÔÇ£It is important to realise that the question before the reviewer is whether or not the dam will fail under a given loading condition. In the review of finite element analysis, it is easy to loose site of the original question in view of the voluminous stress output that typically results. The reviewer should never forget that the stress at a point in the dam may or may not informative with respect to whether or not the dam will fail. Unlike the conventional gravity techniques which pre-suppose failure mechanisms, namely sliding, and overturning, the standard liner elastic finite element method does not address failure mechanism. It is up to the reviewer to determine the value of the analysis based on how it addresses the possibility of failure mechanism.ÔÇØ While doing finite element analysis stresses are to be taken as per formula defined by ÔÇÿRaphael 1984ÔÇÖ to the best of my knowledge. Also different codes permit 33 to 50 % overstressing during EQ. Not known if IIT has considered the same. (Ref: Gravity Dam Design US Army Corps of Engineers EM 1110-2-2200)

    Considering the facts, why IIT Roorkee straight away resorted to finite element method?
    The height of the gravity dam is 54 mts and has a base width of 42 mts. If the base width is 2/3 times height, the resultant force passes through middle third and the structure has to be safe with worst combination of loads including seismic load. For Mullaperiyar the base width provided is 80% of height.
    A retaining structure is checked for safety against (1) Sliding (2) Overturning (3) Foundation settlement. There is a factor of safety assigned to each, varying from 2 to 3, the designer prefer to choose depending up on the reliability of data. Had the dam be unsafe in any of the 3 stability factors, It would have collapsed much earlier. It has withstood one of the worst floods in 1924 and later floods of less severity. (Perhaps the dam prevented flood damage then). A person making the prediction of failure should spell which type of failure is anticipated. If it is due to overturning, where the resultant falls. It should be kept in mind that the FS can be equal to unity during EQ.
    Materials ÔÇô Lime concrete / mortar:
    Who said Hydraulic lime is a bad construction material? The setting time is more then the OPC. But it can be used on-site just as efficiently as modern cement. Shrinkage cracks in mortar are virtually eliminated due to its hydraulic setting characteristics. This also helps to protect the masonry; there is less risk of salt and frost damage. It has a low modulus of elasticity. This means it is extremely flexible and allows for movement and thermal expansion. On the contrary RCC and cement mortar produce hair line cracks due to plastic shrinkage from day one it is poured. The temperature variation produce more cracks by passing of time.
    IIT Roorkee states that there had been many earthquakes above Richter scale 6 in the area.
    Does anyone expect an earthquake of that magnitude in zone 3? One should quote the code or authority for assuming and considering high value of PGA, seismic coefficient or intensity of EQ. Has Kerala ever experienced any severe EQ in history? List of significant EQ in India from 1819 to 2005 is given at:
    No earthquake of magnitude 6 in Richter scale is ever recorded by IMD, who is the authorised agency. As per a report (authenticity unknown) an earthquake measuring Mw -4.6 (approximated to 5.4 in Richter scale) was felt for close to 27 seconds in parts of the states of Kerala and Tamilnadu in 2001. It is not the number of earthquake that matters, It is the intensity that matters.
    In zone 3, even if an EQ measuring 5.0ÔÇô5.9 happens (Moderate) it can cause damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions slight damage to well-designed buildings. But it cannot destroy a dam.
    ÔÇ£Earthquakes can certainly cause damage to dams but complete failure of a large dam due to earthquake damage appears to be very rare.ÔÇØ Else where in India there are bigger dam in worse EQ zones do you expect a total collapse of all?
    China, for example, has thousands of dams in earthquake areas; none has collapsed in recent years from earthquake damage.
    In USA there are 75000 dams small and big. They are in worse EQ zones.
    When the EQ happened in Richter scale 7.7 many thousand building were damaged but no dam had even the slightest damage including one very near epicentre in Kutchch. After the 2011 earthquake off the Pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan with a magnitude 9.0 (Mw), 252 dams were inspected and it was discovered that six embankment dams had shallow cracks on their crests. The reservoir at one concrete gravity dam suffered a small non-serious slope failure. All damaged dams are functioning with no problems.
    How many dams in the world have collapsed due to EQ. Thirty three percent (33%) of failure of dams around the world is due to overflowing, 35% failure is due to foundation failure and less than 6% failure due to other reasons. EQ as a direct reason is rare if not nil. (Please do not quote St. Francis dam. The reason of failure is different).
    Machu Dam:
    It is ridiculous to compare Machu earth dam with at Mullaperiyar gravity dam. An earth bund dam can never with withstand a flood which causes overflow over the earthen bund. An unprecedented rain fall coupled with a manual error of not timely opening the sluice gate was the cause breach. Mullaperiyar has not over flown even in the worst flood in 1924.
    Life of Structures:
    Life of a RCC building or bridge is considered as 50 years and that of a steel structure like bridge is fixed as 100 years. This is taking in to consideration of corrosion of steel, corresponding expansion & pealing of cover and exposure of steel and loosing of tensile strength and metal fatigue. (When the life of a building is 50 years does anybody think, the life of an old temple structure, Red Fort or Kutab Minar life is expired?? !!)
    The oldest man made dam is constructed in 6th century. There are more than 250 gravity dams in Britain. Masonry was used in many early dams, as far back as the 17th Century. Concrete became more common from about 1900 only.
    ÔÇ£Earthquakes can certainly cause damage to dams but complete failure of a large dam due to earthquake damage appears to be very rare.ÔÇØ
    ÔÇ£Dams are likely to exist, perhaps for hundreds of years, even after they are no longer required for their original purpose.ÔÇØ
    So gentlemen, all these present controversy is due to lay-manÔÇÖs apprehension and some self styled expert who wanted to see their name printed or quoted.
    (I was in Gujarat when the Machu dam breached and the worst earthquake occurred. I have both site experience and design experience for quite some period.)

    VK Bhavadasan.
    (Retd. Chief Engineer Civil, Gujarat Maritime Board, Gujarat)

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • QUOTE: ÔÇ£Mr. James Wilson, an

    ÔÇ£Mr. James Wilson, an engineer with the Kerala State Electricity Board and member of Mullaperiyar Special Cell, says if the dam bursts, the flash flood will reach Idukki reservoir within 45 minutes.ÔÇØ
    It is a subject coming under Open Channel Hydraulics. Before making a vague statement, he should have known what is hydraulic head / velocity head, what is velocity, what is cross sectional area / what is wetted perimeter at selected intervals, what is rugosity coeft. A complete contour map of the area including a sounding chart of Iduki lake is required. Does he have all the details and calculated open channel flow using KutterÔÇÖs formula or ManningÔÇÖs formula ?
    VK Bhavadasan.
    (Retd.Chief Engineer (Civil), Gujarat Maritime Board, Gujarat.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Its really an informative and

    Its really an informative and fact full post I have ever read about the Dam issue. This should be made known to the people who cause all kind of nonsensical problems to the common man and properties. We should think and act on the fact not by the vote and race banking politicians.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • The leading sentence: "Kerala

    The leading sentence: "Kerala is trapped by its promise to host Tamil NaduÔÇÖs Mullaperiyar dam for a millennium" is misleading. its not TN's dam. it is Kerala's dam. Kerala is not hosting it, rather own it. Kerala is giving water to TN and that is what the agreement is.
    An independent study (apart from IIT Roorkee's) need to be conducted with the modern scientific techniques and international peer review to find an answer to the question and to alleviate the fears. it should not be an emotional or political issue. it should not add to the list of 'water war' stories.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • It is sad that only Kerala

    It is sad that only Kerala state's view is presented..

    watch out this documentary developed by TN PWD..

    Though the water from dam is used in TN, most of agriculture/diary/poultry raised using that water feeds (yes, feeds) Kerala every day..

    because of local issue in Kerala (bye election in Feb) that decides the fate of govt, issue is blowing up..

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Kerala never been accepted

    Kerala never been accepted their problems, just shifting their problem to others, even Mullaai periyar Lake gets another new dam the real problem canÔÇÖt be solved and Keralites one day they'll realize and U turn against their government and Idukki dam, the reason is simple after constructing the Idukki dam they are getting more earth quakes at nearby area, and these 550 ft high water leveled dam once constructed check before and after construction, how many earth quakes are recorded in these area, but Mullaiperiyar is far away from the most of the epicenter of earth quakes. And 1985 onward linguistic minority Tamil schools are slowly stopped at Idukki dt, , and terminated many of Tamil teachers they are worked more than 10 years but they worked like a bonded labour in a year 11 month and extended another 11 months like, and against Tamils they used ÔÇ£10 paisa land auctionsÔÇØ for their land all of the sudden most of the land owners are landless saying various reasons, most of them they contested in the court to get back their lands but simply solves the same problem by Keralites by mean of money and officials are allowed to do very simply procedures but not in this case of Tamils , in Kerala around 70% of the electricity produced from Idukki dt, but Idukki district mostly populated by Tamils they are neglected electricity and road, I known one of them he applied electricity very first time at 1985 but he get only 2010, that too ÔÇ£Kerala electric BoardÔÇØ peoples unload posts, wires and materials somewhere but peoples are find and transported at their rugged road by JEEP or by lifting all on the hills area (road? DonÔÇÖt ask about road) and post fixing, cable pulling ad other jobs are done by peoples only never do by any of the officials, everything privately they have to do and pay, by the way few years back only power reaches to few, except 40% of the peoples still they are queue at ÔÇ£Ration shop ÔÇ£ to get 2 Liters of Kerosene for lighting , but many of them enjoying produced power to all over Kerala, in this case of road mostly roads are made by peoples only, but Panchayat may be allocate fund every year, but never completes except few , we can say lot of truths, remainsÔÇÖ will come soon.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • thank you sir, am now clear

    thank you sir, am now clear about this issue, people pleaseeeeeeeeeeee read it and educate others abt dis issue,

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • I didnt expect these sort of

    I didnt expect these sort of unscientific report from Down To earth... IIT roorke is a partisan report, it doesn't had any bipartisan approval. The IIT roorke reports cant stand infront of any legal syste, Ok Lets ask weather IIT roorke people could publish their content in any national peer reviewed journal if not international journal...

    Down To Earth please publish the stories with two sides perspective. Don't publish stories from one state alone. Please don't fall prey to M-Factored people thereby don't loose the respect for your journal please.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Let us not bring extraneous

    Let us not bring extraneous things into this controversy. The question is water for tamilnadu of requisite quantity and safety for keralites. As one in engineering, software is used ito simulate conditions of high wind and earth quake in construction of electric high tension transmission towers in UAE. Was anything like that done for idukki? Idukki is a curved dam flanked by Kuravan and Kurathi malai. The epicentre of quakes have been in the arabian sea or indian ocean.
    The ripples of ground waves of quake is resisted by the soil formations at such depths as kilometres. Idukki at lower MSL is susceptible to strong ground waves than the mullaiperiyar dam. Tsunami waves travelled from Indonesia to indian shores only because it is a surface travel of high winds and water is lifted by winds and that is not the case with resistive ground for quake waves. The "enlightened and knowledgeable" engineering brains of Kerala only advised for legislation of safe water height as 136 feet which is now wanted to be reduced to 120 feet. It looks like the outbursts of a drunkard. It is stated that quakes at richter scale 6 have occurred but the dam withstood it. Kerala politicians are spreading misinformtion as though they have a genie that will construct a dam the minute it is commanded. It is part of silent valley where dam or water storage or hydro electric projects are prohibited. The proposed dam should be at lower level than mullai periyar. When Idukki and Mullaiperiyar are susceptible to quakes, will not the new dam be? It has to be on high foundation for which deep piles are to be erected which is a time consuming process. Further, during monsoon which is from June to Dec, no work is possible at the site. The shock waves for pile foundations themselves may be sufficient to cause failure of both idukki and mullaiperiyar dams. What about a quake of richter scale 6.0 when the new dam is half way? will it not collapse and cause rebuilding? Politicians are exploiting the emotions and induced fears of public.
    The best way should be to retain the water level at 136 feet as per legislation by evacuating the excess water towards vaigai dam. In the thousands of years of flow, water would have formed natural stream ways to Idukki side which may be maintained for emergency discharge. The precautionary measures against disasters will cost much much less than the cost of a new dam which will damage the ecology which nature has built over thousands of years. It will be in the interest of Tamilnadu to construct dams on its side to relieve the feared stress on mullai periyar. A FRESH DAM IS CERTAINLY NOT THE SOLUTION. IT IS A GIMMICK PLAYED BY KERALA POLITICIANS WHICH HAS ROUSED THE ANTI KERALITE FEELINGS IN TAMILNADU VIOLENTLY AND HAS IMPERILLED THE LIFE AND LIVELIHOOD OF PEACEFULLY LIVING KERALITES IN TAMILNADU. Kerala has less space for agriculture and needs less water. A survey will tell that lack of check dams has deprived the vlllages of water in the wells as also the sand mining. At national level, a scheme should be planned for diverting the discharges into the sea to tamilnadu for useful agriculture. Framers of constitution would not have dreamt that the future generations would be fighting like the street dogs for the left over food for sharing the natural resources. Thank God, nature provided Air, fire and sky every where or else Kerala politicians will be claiming the pound of flesh. In these conditions, some idiots are talking about Ganga kaveri linkage. Hell with it.

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Thanks to Mr. Bhavadasan and

    Thanks to Mr. Bhavadasan and it is a moral duty of engineers all over india to protect the good structure such as mullaiperiyar dam by analysing engineering point of view not politically.mullaiperiyar is a beauty of engineering .never ever a responsible engineer would break a good structure which was constructed by a another engineer.

    over and over time , experts have confirmed the dam is safe.since kerala reduced the dam height in the name of safety by false propaganda, not only tamil nadu,india too is losing productivity.More production of food items would help reserve bank of india to control inflation.

    also kerala too has been benefiting form the dam such as fishing in the dam, food security& food supply from mp dam,the whole thekkedy is being developed because of mp dam.can kerala deny this fact.kerala is getting income from tourism. mp is acting as flood control structures is also responsible for kerala people safety.without strong facts tn would not say , mp dam is safe. tn is too accountable for kerala safety.

    before constructing idduki dam ,the whole downstream is protected by mp dam.can kerala deny this.without spending even a penny, kerala too has been getting benefits although they did not manufacture/produce water.water is coing from the nature, unfortunately the 70% of catchment area in kerala as per water atlas 1995 which was too prepared by kerala(remaining in TN).if the MP dam &iddukky(kamaraj giffted mp ,idduky to kerala) had been annexed to Tn during state reorganization time, tn would have produced 50,000 crore of food item by maintaining the dam height 152 ft from 1979 to till india too lost.

    mp was constructed by madras govt with great will will not collapse due to its sound design as explained by engineer Bhavadasan.

    there is an hidden agenda behind this story. kerala wants to control the dam although they did not construct the mp dam.british and tamils put their effort to construct this mp irrespective of harsh climatic conditions and with limited facilities that too a century ago.

    if any newtral expert/engineer check the mp dam and its uses would conclude it is a mega success project with multible uses for both tn and kerala and ultimately to india.its like a historical monument.



    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply
  • Hi It is interesting to note

    It is interesting to note that idukki dam is built for PGA of 0.025 so if you take IIT Roorkee report and assume that Earthquake occurs at Thekadi-Kodaivannalur Fault, then idduki dam will be located at 16+50 =66KM. So if we use the IIT Report formula, we find that the PGA generated at 66KM when Earthquake is 5.5 Richter will be 0.0259. In short it means while idukki dam will fail when Earthquake of 5.5 occurs, Mullaperiyar dam will stay!

    Posted by: Anonymous | 8 years ago | Reply