MOEF, Jal Shakti said no, but panel tells SC 5 hydro projects on Ganga are good to go

Last Updated02/12/2024

Observing that the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks, a Supreme Court-appointed panel has backed setting up five hydroelectric projects (HEPs) on the Ganga and its tributaries in Uttarakhand.

The Supreme Court has been deliberating on the feasibility of new hydroelectric projects (HEPs) along the Ganga and its tributaries since 2013. This scrutiny began after the devastating Kedarnath floods in 2013, which killed over 5,000 people, raising questions about the role of HEPs in exacerbating such disasters.

2013 Moratorium: A halt on new HEP approvals was imposed pending impact studies.
Formation of Committees: Over the years, three committees under different leadership reviewed the ecological and social implications of HEPs.

Ravi Chopra Committee (2014): Concluded that HEPs worsened the disaster and advised against 24 proposed projects.
Vinod Tare Committee (2015): Raised concerns about serious ecological impacts of six specific projects.
B.P. Das Committee (2020): Recommended approval of 28 projects but faced objections regarding inadequate assessments.
In 2021, the government approved only seven projects with ongoing construction, citing national priorities.

A Supreme Court-appointed high-level committee, led by Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan, recently revisited the B.P. Das report to evaluate 21 remaining HEPs.
Projects Approved
The panel cleared five projects:
- Bowala Nandprayag (300 MW, Alaknanda River)
- Devasri (252 MW, Pinder River)
- Bhyundar Ganga (24.3 MW)
- Jhalakoti (12.5 MW)
- Urgam-II (7.5 MW)
Rationale for Approval:
- Benefits of these projects outweigh potential drawbacks.
- Lack of clear evidence linking HEP structures to landslides.
- National interest in augmenting renewable energy capacity.
Projects Rejected: The panel ruled out 15 other projects due to:
- Vulnerability to glacial lake outburst floods (7 projects).
- Adverse impacts on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (8 projects).

Jal Shakti Ministry: Criticized the cumulative impact analysis, citing risks to rivers such as Alaknanda, Bhilangana, and Dhauliganga.
Environment Ministry: Highlighted critical issues like:
Vulnerability to landslides, seismic activities, and glacial lake outburst floods.
Past disasters (e.g., Joshimath subsidence, Chamoli earthquake) occurring near project sites.
Both ministries raised concerns over the fragile Himalayan ecology and potential exacerbation of disasters.

On November 13, the Centre was granted eight weeks to finalize its decision after examining the recommendations of the B.P. Das committee and Somanathan panel.