How serious was the Maharashtra chief minister when he mentioned environment as a reason for scrapping the gas-based Enron project?
WHILE scrapping the 2,015 mw,
Rs 9,050-crore Dabhol Power Company's (DPC) Enron project, Maharashtra chief minister Manohar Joshi
cited the lack of environmental con-
cerns in its plan as one of the grounds
for his drastic move. But energy and
development experts like Kirit Parikh,
director, Indira Gandhi Institute of
Development Research, Bombay, and
Amulya K N Reddy, director, International Energy Initiative, Bangalore,
emphasise that the hitches are financial
and procedural impropriety, not environmental.
"In this case, environmentalists
deserve no sympathy," says Parikh, who
had raised cudgels against the
Enron project in April 1993 on
economic grounds. He questions the Maharashtra government's wisdom of dragging
invalid environmental arguments into a controversial decision.
Says Parikh, "When projects based on - coal, nuclear
energy and hydel power are
being opposed on environmental
grounds, what are we left with? The
cleanest available option is gas. At this
stage, the government should have
allowed the project to go on with renegotiations on costs."
The country's power needs are
shooting up, necessitating an expansion
at an annual growth rate of installed
capacity of 9.85 per cent, points out
Reddy. An eminent energy expert,
Reddy does not see the Enron project as
a long-term solution to the energy crisis,
but gives an almost clean chit to the
company on the environmental count.
But Manohar Joshi, while announcing. the scrap decision, told the state
assembly on August 3, "The tragedy of
all environmentaf -tiscussions so, far as
been that, instead of considering the
environmental impact, Z70-timlle has
been spent discussing how gas as a fuel is
less environmentally harmful compared to coil."
Going by the available studies on the
DPC, Joshi's statement is rather baseless,
far even environmentalists consider
glas-base4, units the cleanest after hydel
units. @1@ Union ministry of environment and forests (MEF) green signalled
the project in November 1994 after
clearance from a High Court-hppointed
expert committee. Then the MEF accepted the D's Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA),report showing only a
nominal increase in air pollution levels.
The project's critics dismiss several
of these studies. Alleges Debi Goenka of
the Bombay-based Society for Clean
Environment, "So far, no EIA has been
made public." He says the DPC would
lead to the Konkan belt's largescale
industrialisation, causing further pollution and displacement. Former Congress chief minister Sharad Pawar had a
Rs 65,000-crore industrial development
plan for this region, according to press reports.
Parikh agrees that despite the lower
air pollution levels, the project does
raise more vital issues regarding thermal
pollution and safety, and shift in land
use patterns.
As the DPC would pump out into the
sea about 90,000 cubic in of hot water
per day after the cooling cycle of the
plant raising the sea water temperature
by 5 Celsius, it can possibly affect marine life, especially spawning fish. However, the Dpc newsletter Dabhol Samvad claims that as water would be released at the rat of 1 cubic m/second, its temper
atura4ill become same as the sea water
within,@ e 15 in radius. "No difference
41 be- It beyond a circular zone of 30
4 diairifter," the newsletter said.
However, Reddy is strident in his
opposition, "Any solution, such as
Enron, which does not result in improving the technical and financial performance of the associated state electricity
board, is a wrong solution and must be
rejected." He adds, "Similarly, any solution that undermires rather than
strengthen the capacity and human
resources of the indigenous electrical
equipment industry is an unacceptable
solution." In long-term perspective, he
says that "the genuine solution to the
crisis of the electricity system is a shift to
the new energy paradigm, with the
emphasis changing from energy consumption to energy services as an index of development."
Parikh criticises the way
the project agreement was
reached, without comparative
bidding, allowing unchecked
cost escalation. He says that the
government should have let
the project to go ahead at this
stage, cuttirig, down capacity charges so that per unit energy
charge could be reduced.
The question is whether or not a
government can raise invalid envionmental arguments to score a political
point over its predecessor. Joshi, during
his tenure as mayor of Bombay, had
coined the slogan "Clean Bombay
Green Bombay". Still, industrial belts in
and around Bombay remain an open
dumpyard for hazardous wastes, and
rivers and creeks are dying. The government's coalition partner, Shiv Sena
supremo Bal Thackeray, is not very
vocal about this or the plight of the
Maharashtra oustees of the Narmada
project. Obviously, sloganeering of his
kind is not necessarily based on facts or
a strong will.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
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.