Janaki Lenin
The Guardian
May 30, 2015
Within a week, India’s ministry of environment and forest finds itself committed to conducting an overall impact assessment of dams in the rivers Ganga and Brahmaputra.
Ranganadi hydroelectric project, one of several dams in Arunachal Pradesh, India. Photograph: Alamy
The supreme court stopped the construction of dams on the river Ganga soon after the devastating floods that swept the state of Uttarakhand in June 2013. Many blamed them for exacerbating destruction. An 11-member expert committee recommended that 23 dams on the Alaknanda and Bhagirathi rivers, the two main tributaries of the Ganga, be scrapped. Builders of six dams in the upper Ganga basin asked the court to allow their projects to proceed. The six were among the 23 vetoed dams. Instead of accepting the expert committee’s advice, the court asked for a review committee to specifically examine the environmental clearances given to these six dams.
What difference does it make whether the six dams had environmental clearances? Besides the expert committee, these dams were vetoed by the wildlife institute of India as well, because they would irrevocably damage biodiversity. Ordinarily, environmental clearances that functioned as if ecosystems and wildlife mattered would winnow out destructive projects. In India, these systems are flawed. Take the case of the Dibang hydroelectric dam in Arunachal Pradesh for instance. The environment impact assessment (EIA) was farcical, and forest clearance was granted under pressure from the prime minister’s office.
In a report submitted to the ministry of environment and forests on February 12 this year, a four-member review committee said although the six dams possessed all the requisite environmental clearances, they needed re-evaluation. Since the floods had altered the terrain dramatically, the clearances were outdated. Instead of reporting this to the supreme court, the ministry said the committee had verified that the six dams had all the required environmental clearances. And they were good to go.
When the Business Standard pointed this out, the court asked the ministry to submit the committee’s full report.
On May 12, instead of submitting its affidavit and the full report, the ministry asked for yet another committee to examine the recommendations of the 4-member review committee as well as evaluate all other dams throughout the Ganga basin. Environmentalists have been demanding just this kind of assessment.
Meanwhile, in eastern Himalayas, Pradip Kumar Bhuyan and Joydeep Bhuyan, who run a school in Guwahati, Assam, have filed a case in the national green tribunal. They want the ministry to evaluate 135 dams slated to be built across the river Brahmaputra and its tributaries in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. Several of the dams face widespread opposition from residents in downstream Assam who expect their livelihoods to take a beating.
A fisherman on the banks of the river Brahmaputra in Assam. Fishing is one occupation expected to suffer from the construction of dams. Photograph: Anupam Nath/AP
The Lower Subansiri dam has been stuck since 2011 because of people’s opposition to it. Since 2003, the estimated cost of building it has more than doubled from Rs. 6,285 crores (£630m) to Rs. 15,894 crores.
Although numerous dams were approved individually, the ministry has not looked at their impact on the entire river basin. Chief minister Nabam Tuki of Arunachal Pradesh said his state had the potential to generate nearly 60,000 megawatts of power from the Brahmaputra basin. Despite growing environmental, safety, and displacement concerns, 160 projects with a capacity of almost 47,000 megawatts have already been allotted.
On May 7, the tribunal ordered the ministry to evaluate the dams’ overall impact on biodiversity and on the people of the Brahmaputra basin.
Finally, the ministry will conduct what environmentalists have been demanding for a long time: basin-wide impact assessments of dams scheduled to be constructed across two of the largest rivers in India.
