DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Reassessment on the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project and the Weirs Management

4대강 살리기사업의 재평가와 보의 운용방안

  • Lee, Jong Ho (Department of Urban Planning and Real Estate, Cheongju University)
  • 이종호 (청주대학교 도시계획부동산학과)
  • Received : 2021.08.02
  • Accepted : 2021.08.19
  • Published : 2021.08.31

Abstract

The master plan for the Four Rivers Restoration Project (June 2009) was devised, the procedure of pre-environmental review (June 2009) and environmental impact assessment (Nov. 2009), and post-environmental impact survey were implemented, and 4 times audits also inspected. and finally the Ministry of Environment's Four Rivers Investigation and Evaluation Planning Committee proposed the dismantling or partial dismantling of the five weirs of the Geum River and Yeongsan River. But controversies and conflicts are still ongoing. Therefore, this study intend to reestablish the management plan for the four major rivers by reviewing and analyzing the process so far. The results are as follows. First, a cost-benefit analysis should be performed by comparing the water quality impact of weir operation and weir opening. Therefore, it is inevitably difficult to conduct cost-benefit analysis. Second, according to the results of cost-benefit analysis on the dismantling of the Geum River and the Yeongsan River, the dismantling of the weir and the regular sluice gate opening was decided. However, there is a problem in the validity of the decision to dismantle the weir because the cost-benefit analysis for maintaining the weir is not carried out. Third, looking at the change in water quality of 16 weirs before and after the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, COD and Chl-a were generally deteriorated, and BOD, SS, T-N, and T-P improved. However, in the cost-benefit analysis related to water quality at the time of weir dismantling, only COD items were targeted. Therefore, the cost of BOD, SS, T-N, and T-P items improved after the project were not reflected in the cost-benefit analysis of dismantling weirs, so the water quality benefits were exaggerated. Fourth, in the case of Gongju weir and Juksan weir, most of them are movable weirs, so opening the weir alone can have the same effect as dismantling when the water quality deteriorates. Since the same effect can be expected, there is little need to dismantle the weirs. Fifth, in order to respond to frequent droughts and floods, it is desirable to secure the agricultural water supply capacity to the drought areas upstream of the four majorrivers by constructing a waterway connected to the weir. At present it is necessary to keep weirs rather than dismantling them.

4대강 살리기사업(이하 4대강 사업)에 대한 마스터플랜, 사전환경성검토, 환경영향평가, 사후환경 영향조사, 4차례의 감사, 환경부 4대강 조사·평가 기획위원회의 금강과 영산강의 5개 보에 대한 해체 또는 부분 해체 제안 등을 고찰·분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째 보 운영과 보 개방으로 인한 수질 영향을 비교하여 비용편익분석을 해야 하나 보 개방시 수질 측정자료 부족으로 보 건설전 수질 측정자료로 대체하였기 때문에 수질 영향 분석이 미흡하여 비용편익분석이 제대로 될 수 없었다. 둘째, 금강과 영산강의 보 해체에 대한 비용편익분석 결과에 따라 세종보와 공주보의 해체, 백제보의 수문 상시 개방, 죽산보의 해체, 승촌보의 수문 상시 개방을 결정하였으나, 보 유지시에 대한 비용편익분석을 실시하지 않아 보 해체 결정의 타당성에 문제가 있다. 셋째 4대강 사업 전후 16개 보의 수질 변화를 보면 COD와 Chl-a는 대체로 악화되었고 BOD, SS, T-N, T-P는 개선되었다. 그러나 보 해체시 수질 관련 비용편익분석에서 4대강 사업후 악화된 COD 항목만을 반영하였고 4대강 사업후 개선된 BOD, SS, T-N, T-P 항목에 대한 수질 관련 비용(편익)은 반영하지 않았으므로, 보 해체 편익 산정시 수질 편익이 지나치게 과장되었다고 볼 수 있다. 넷째 공주보와 죽산보의 경우 가동보가 대부분이라 수질 악화시 특히 녹조 심화시 보 개방으로 보 해체와 같은 효과를 기대할 수 있고, 세종보도 가동보가 전체 보 길이의 64%나 되므로 보 개방으로 보 해체 시와 비슷한 효과를 얻을 수 있다. 댐·보·저수지 연계운영을 통해 수질관리가 가능하므로 보 해체만이 수질관리나 수생태계 개선방안이라 단정할 수 없다. 다섯째 가뭄과 홍수에 대응하기 위해 보와 연계되는 도수로 건설로 4대강 상류 가뭄지역에 대한 농업용수 공급 능력을 확보하는 것이 필요하므로, 현재로서는 보의 해체보다는 보의 활용 방안을 모색해야 할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Board of Audit and Inspection. 2018. Audit Report - Inspection and performance analysis of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project; pp. 4-5, 29-30, 213-214, 312, 340, 374, 390-391. [Korean Literature]
  2. Economic Analysis Forum of the Four Major Rivers Investigation and Evaluation Team, Ministry of Environment. 2019. A socioeconomic analysis study on the management plan of the Geumgang and Yeongsan rivers. [Korean Literature]
  3. Joint Ministries. 2021. 1st National Water Management Master Plan (2021-2030); p. 78. [Korean Literature]
  4. Korean Society of Environmental Engineers. 2018. Water quality evaluation and analysis of causes of water quality change in weir sections related to the Four Rivers Restoration Project, Volume 1 (Part 1-2, Investigation and Evaluation of Water Quality before and after the Four Major Rivers Project); pp. 558-559, 570, 573. [Korean Literature]
  5. Kwater. 2018. A Study on Standard of Reservoir Water Allocation (2nd Year); pp. 197-199. [Korean Literature]
  6. Lee JH. 2010. National Projects and Impact Assessment by Presidential Promise, Journal of Environmental Studies, 49, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University. [Korean Literature]
  7. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, Four Rivers Restoration Promotion Headquarters. 2009. Master Plan for Restoring Four Rivers; pp. 7-8. [Korean Literature]
  8. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Korea Water Resources Corporation, National Institute of Environmental Research, and Korea Rural Community Corporation. 2017. Optimal linkage operation plan of dam-weir-reservoir; pp. 64-70. [Korean Literature]
  9. The Korean Association of Public Finance. 2019. A study on socioeconomic analysis on the management plan for river facilities in the Geum River and Yeongsan Rivers 59: 26-120. [Korean Literature]
  10. https://www.icold-cigb.org/GB/dams/definition_of_a_large_dam.asp
  11. https://www.kwater.or.kr/water/sub01/sub05/20060557/works.do?brdId=KO27&s_officecode=50039 531&s_flag=1&s_mid=1354
  12. Korea Policy Briefing (https://www.korea.kr/news/pressReleaseView.do?newsId=155704737)
  13. Case information of the National Law Information Center (https://www.law.go.kr/LSW//precInfoP.do?precSeq=179811)