Why EIA 2020 is a sure-shot recipe for more environmental disasters
On June 9, 2019, there was a massive fire at Well No. 5 at the Baghjan oil field in Assam’s Tinsukia district. Barely two weeks earlier, the same oil well operated by state-owned Oil India Ltd (OIL) had a major accident on May 27, when there was a blowout during routine work. The massive blaze on June 9 was so extensive that it could be seen from a distance of 30 km; a thick-black pall of smoke billowing from the well engulfed the area. Two firefighters died in the blast, and thousands of people living in the vicinity had to be shifted to a relief camp. One of the factors for concern was the proximity of the oil field to the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park, which is rich in biodiversity and home to 36 species of mammals and 400 species of birds. After the initial blowout, when natural gas and oil seeped from the well, there were quite a few carcasses of marine animals that were discovered, including those of the critically endangered Gangetic Dolphins.
Just over a month ago, on May 7, a polymer industrial plant operated by LG in Vizag leaked toxic gas in the air. The poisonous gas leak killed 12 people and sent hundreds to the hospital. Established in 1965 by Hindustan Polymers, the plant had been taken over by South Korean firm LG in 1997, manufacturing polystyrene and expandable polystyrene using imported styrene and reprocessing of primary plastics into engineering plastics.
While the two industrial accidents are apart in timelines and geography, there's a common thread that connects the two. Both these tragedies could have been possibly avoided had there been serious effort undertaken when the environmental clearances for the projects were sought. The oil field in Assam has been mired in controversies for many years, especially for not conducting public hearings as part of the due environmental impact assessment (EIA) process. Meanwhile, the LG Polymers plant too ran afoul with the environment ministry. The ministry's expert panel on 'violations' raised questions on the chemical unit operating at existing capacity, ramping up production and changing product mix without the necessary green nod from the Centre.
The need for EIA
Both OIL and LG had faltered on the environmental aspects of the project, taking the process for granted and paid a heavy price. It is a fallacy to believe that prior environment clearance or EIA is merely about assessing the impact of the project on the environment and ecology. Instead, such surveys are more about evaluating the risk the project poses to the area and the community. EIA is a process of assessing the likely environmental impacts of a proposed project or development, taking into account inter-related socio-economic, cultural and human-health impacts, both beneficial and adverse. A typical EIA would weigh in the various risk factors associated with the project, and then factor in the human angle, primarily those directly impacted by the project. Thus EIA is not only comprehensive but also essential. If done correctly, it can be an eye-opener in many ways.
But sadly, the government of the day does not seem to be of that opinion. In a recent notification, the GoI has proposed an entirely new set of norms and regulations governing the environment clearance for industrial projects like highways, mines, airports, dams, etc. Dubbed as EIA 2020, it brings significant changes to the existing EIA process. The new draft aims to ease procedures for business clearances, does away with the public hearings for many projects, reduces the number of days for public hearings for others, eases rules of expansion for projects and so on. In short, the draft weakens public consultation process, emboldens violators, and reposits a lot of discretionary powers with the authorities.
On March 12, just before the COVID-19 pandemic engulfed India, the Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) published the draft EIA notification seeking public feedback within a 60-day timeframe. After many representations were made to the ministry in lieu with the inability of the public to respond due to the epidemic, the government extended the notice period till June 30. The Delhi High Court extended the deadline further till August 11 for public feedback on the draft Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification 2020. Based on the feedback, amendments will be made to the notification or it might be quashed.
EIA as a hindrance?
To be fair, the attack on environment clearances is not unexpected. For the past few years, the MoEFCC has stated obliquely that progress is being hampered because of the environmental clearance processes. The government under the stewardship of PM Narendra Modi has been keen to either do away these processes or whittle them down to a bare minimum. It is almost as if environmental damage is an acceptable collateral cost for development. As a result, the environment ministry is frequently caught in controversies, like the massive Etalin Hydroelectric project in Dibang Valley in Arunachal Pradesh. After accusations that the power project was being rushed through without adequate environmental considerations, the forest advisory committee (FAC) withheld its verdict on the future of the project.
If the new EIA modifications are accepted, it will bring a comprehensive shift in the manner in which projects are executed in India. Coal mining, real estate and power projects will be cleared without many hurdles. While projects concerning national defence and security are naturally considered strategic, the government gets to decide on the "strategic" tag for other projects. According to news reports, the 2020 draft says no information on "such projects shall be placed in the public domain". This ambiguity might lead to a lot of project clearances without adequate consultation or ownership.
Also, one of the significant shifts in the new draft is how violations would be treated. Projects that are operating in violation of the Environment Act will now be able to apply for post-facto clearance. It is a reiteration of a March 2017 notification for projects operating without clearance. The violator will be able to get away by paying a fine. All a violator will need are two plans for remediation and resource augmentation corresponding to 1.5-2 times "the ecological damage assessed and economic benefit derived due to violation". It is a pay-as-you-pollute scheme.
The implications for future
Another rather absurd portion deals with how violations will be reported. The 2020 draft also spells out how the government will take cognizance of such violations. It has to be reported either by a government authority or the developers themselves. There is no scope for any public complaint about infringements. The violators are now burdened with the responsibility to report themselves in. That is so interesting.
Yet, let it also be known that EIA is not infallible. Since external auditors and consultants conduct the exercise, getting a favorable report is not all that tough. Take the case of the Commonwealth Games (CWG) in 2010. When the CWG village was constructed in Delhi, a lot of experts had warned that they were built on the Yamuna floodplains. NEERI, a premier government institution, submitted a favourable report stating that the site of this real estate project was neither a riverbed nor the floodplains of the river Yamuna. And yet in the same year during the rains, the whole complex was flooded with rainwater, risking the entire construction just a few days before the games were to start.
But even with the frailties, the EIA process is essential. Especially, as it gives a chance to the local population to weigh in on the project and express their misgivings.
It is pertinent to point out that the infra projects in India are still executed with a colonial mindset. For instance, take the Etalin Project, to supply power to the Eastern grid; thousands of people are to be displaced without a second thought. Pristine forests will be destroyed -- but then how does it matter as long as we get our uninterrupted power supply in the cities. This local exploitation at the cost of national convenience is a big cause for environmental degradation.
Take another instance, where ecology and economics collide. On March 29, 2019, the Supreme Court suspended the environmental clearance (EC) for the building of the second airport at Mopa in Goa, and directed Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) to revisit the decision in light of its impact on ecology. In response, Amitabh Kant, CEO, Niti Ayog, wrote in a column, "It is one thing to take into account the ecology, sensitivity and fragility of the environment. But to put a complete stop to a critically important project that will greatly enhance one of India's most popular tourist destination's capacity could be irreparably harmful for investor confidence and foreign investment."
The court was raising concerns on ecology, while the arguments were being made on investment and investor confidence. Nonetheless, the decks were cleared for the construction of the second airport in January 2020. Investment prevailed over the environment.
There are hundreds of such projects that are littered around India, caught in the crosshairs of authorities and environmentalists. Posco, or Enron, Lavasa, Sardar Sarovar Project, Tehri Dam, all vibrant instances of how we have failed to incorporate eco-consciousness and progress. We must not look at ecological conservation and economic growth as two mutually exclusive goals. There are numerous instances where both can co-exist. While India has been home to some of the worst industrial disasters in the world, like the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, it is also important to point out that India was one of the first countries in the world to enshrine environment as a fundamental duty under the Indian constitution.
And it isn't as if, this consciousness for the environment is new or limited to environmentalists. Way back on August 15, 1957, the first prime minister of India Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru wrote a letter to the chief ministers of various states and devoted one page outlining the subtle balance of nature and raising questions regarding the adverse effects of numerous river valley and industrial projects on the environment. Nehru went on to plead with the concerned CMs to implement environmental assessment of projects and take a stand in favor of sustainability.
Now if the Father of Modern India was conscious about the need to balance nature and progress, shouldn't we then pay a little more attention to such issues? Remember degradation happens once, remedial measures cannot compensate for the damage. We live in a world that is hurtling towards a catastrophic future. If we don't realise our wanton ways now, it would be too late.
In the context of EIA 2020, the least that we as citizens can do is drop a mail to "[email protected]" or "[email protected]" sharing our misgivings and thoughts on the new draft regulations. Honestly, asking for a complete withdrawal of the notification would be entirely appropriate too. After all, we already have a process, what is the need to make it worse, if not better.
Remember the last date to send comments is August 11, 2020
Originally published on Moneycontrol
P.S. All images randomly downloaded from Internet. No copyright claims
P.S.2 Views are strictly personal