I join the discussion regarding the need to restore the Kakhovka Reservoir. Here are the arguments against its restoration:
- Logistics: To connect the right and left banks of the Dnieper River, bridges are needed, not the restoration of the reservoir. Instead, new bridges can be built over the natural riverbed, which is not possible if the reservoir is restored.
- Desertification: With an annual precipitation of about 400 mm, a desert will not form. The area of the former reservoir will initially be overgrown with weeds. It would be better for people to assist this process by seeding or planting vegetation on these lands, for example, using drones. In the future, part of these lands could be used for growing energy willows, considering the proximity of groundwater.
- Water supply: Kryvyi Rih is already restoring its water supply by utilizing water from the Kremenchuk Reservoir, which comes through the Inhulets River. A water pipeline is being built from Zaporizhzhia to Manganese, Nikopol, and Pokrov. The cooling pond of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is located on the banks of the natural riverbed of the Dnieper, so supplying water there is not difficult. Diversification of water supply is an important measure to counter terrorist threats.
- Decreased water volume: Without the Kakhovka Reservoir, the amount of water in the Dnieper will not decrease. From the Kakhovka Reservoir, the average annual evaporation losses amounted to 1.81 cubic kilometers, which means that the annual flow of the Dnieper would increase by this volume of water. Seasonal fluctuations in river flow are regulated by the five Dnieper reservoirs. During low-water periods, they are intended to release water downstream.
- Irrigation: The challenge lies in raising water from the natural riverbed of the Dnieper to a height of about 10-20 meters to match the elevation of existing canals and aqueducts (including the North Crimean Canal). Modern pumping systems and a network of small hydraulic structures (ponds) could be developed. Solar power stations on the former reservoir lands can generate the necessary electricity. Irrigation canals in the steppe led to soil bogging and secondary salinization. Modern irrigation technologies, such as drip irrigation, require less water and enable the development of intensive farming (vegetable production), which is more profitable than growing grain crops.
- The emergence of 2,000 km² of land that can be beneficial. This land can be used for construction, solar power plant installations, cultivation of specific crops, restoration of natural landscapes, and more. The conditions for manganese ore mining in the Nikopol Basin have improved.
- Possibility of restoring (reconstructing) sacred places for Ukrainians – elements of the Great Meadow and the Sich: Tomakivska, Bazavlutska, Mykytynska, Chortomlynska, Nova Sich (Pidpilnentska). Archaeological research of this territory is starting.
- Improvement of Dnieper water quality due to the absence of stagnation, marsh formation, and algal blooms. The restoration of natural spawning grounds for valuable fish species (sturgeons) becomes possible.
- Avoiding the danger of dam destruction: People who experienced the tragedy caused by the destruction of the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant dam would unlikely want to be exposed to such a threat again, which would occur if the reservoir is restored.
- Restoration of navigation on the Dnieper can be achieved through dredging, construction of locks, or, as a last resort, bypass canals. Most of the rapids were flooded by the Dnieper Reservoir. It is necessary to study the experience of EU countries where similar rivers are navigable without the creation of reservoirs.
- For those who advocate for the restoration of the dam, I propose considering the option of constructing dams along the Dnieper that would allow raising water levels without flooding lands. Let Ukrhydroenergo include this in their budget. Its director, Ihor Syrota, mentioned that restoring the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant would require $1 billion and 5 years, so perhaps this amount could be used for building protective dams. Additionally, there are run-of-the-river hydroelectric power plants that do not require the construction of dams. Unfortunately, small hydropower plants, which devastate our rivers, are classified under the “green” tariff, allowing them to profit significantly at the expense of our pockets. As of early 2022, the share of hydropower and pumped storage power plants in Ukraine’s electricity production structure was only 6.7%. I hope for wise decisions by Ukrainians who will be guided by modern approaches to environmental management and not restore “Soviet monsters.” In the USA and the EU, thousands of dams have already been dismantled, and they have significant positive experience with reservoir decommissioning (dams removed in the USA: https://www.americanrivers.org/dams/database/; dams removed in the EU: https://damremoval.eu/dam-removal-map-europe/). Our task as scientists is to explore all aspects and experiences of leading countries, engage in discussions, and provide explanations. I thank our defenders for the opportunity to live and work. My condolences go to all who have suffered from the war. Glory to Ukraine!
- Olga Helevera
