NACEJ Urgent Appeal to MoEF & CC & Karnataka Govt: Save River Sharavathy, Safeguard Western Ghats: Refuse clearance and cancel the proposed 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project
napm india
From: NACEJ Climate Justice Forum <nacej...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct, 2025, 7:30 am
Subject: NACEJ Urgent Appeal to MoEF & CC & Karnataka Govt: Save River Sharavathy, Safeguard Western Ghats: Refuse clearance and cancel the proposed 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project
To: <secy...@nic.in>, <cm....@nic.in>, <c...@karnataka.gov.in>
Cc: <me...@gov.in>, <bhupend...@sansad.nic.in>, <c...@karnataka.gov.in>, <monito...@nic.in>, <chai...@kspcb.gov.in>, <adgw...@nic.in>, Hari Shanker Singh <hss...@gmail.com>, <cc...@gmail.com>, <yogen...@nic.in>, <dgfi...@nic.in>, <monitor...@nic.in>, <monito...@nic.in>, <Adgf...@nic.in>, <mos...@gov.in>, <rosz.b...@nic.in>, <m...@kspcb.gov.in>, <shi...@kspcb.gov.in>, <kar...@kspcb.gov.in>, <Deo.s...@gmail.com>, <dcka...@gmail.com>
24th Oct, 2025
Urgent Appeal to refuse clearance and cancel the proposed 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project: Save River Sharavathy, Safeguard Western Ghats
|
To, Mr. Tanmay Kumar, Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Govt of India, New Delhi |
To, Shri Siddaramaiah Chief Minister, Govt of Karnataka Vidhan Soudha, Bengaluru |
Dear Mr. Tanmay Kumar and Siddaramaiah avare,
This representation is being sent on behalf of the National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ), a pan Indian forum of the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), comprising grassroots activists, ecologists, climate scientists, environmental researchers and lawyers as well as the All-India Rivers Forum of NAPM. We are writing with immense concern regarding the need to protect the Western Ghats from further destructive activities like deforestation, tunnelling and disturbing the natural riverine ecosystem of Sharavathy, in the garb of ‘development’ projects.
We hereby call upon the MoEF & CC not to grant clearance to the proposed 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project (PSP) on the river Sharavathy, considering the serious ecological, social, archaeological, and cultural impacts. We urge the Chief Minister and Govt of Karnataka to take cognizance of the ongoing people’s struggle in this regard, dialogue with all stakeholders, cancel the Project, explore effective alternatives and take up urgent measures for effective conservation of the fragile Western Ghats.
In the past few years, Pumped Storage Projects (PSP) have been proposed to manage peak electricity demand and to store solar and wind power to make it available during non-solar/ non-wind hours. (Although in the case of the current project, official documents only refer to peak power demand). While peak demand management is necessary, all available alternatives must be considered and those with the lowest environmental impact must be chosen. Unfortunately, PSPs are being planned in Ecologically Sensitive Zones (ESZ), forest areas, even in wildlife sanctuaries and this would have an adverse impact on the environment and livelihoods of local communities.
The 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project proposed by Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) on the river Sharavathy is located in an ESZ. Western Ghats is a biodiversity hotspot recognised as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Though it is home to over 5,000 endemic plant species and 325 endemic animal species, the habitat is severely fragmented by the numerous projects, such as hydropower, power transmission lines, highways and railways, that are already in existence. Further fragmentation of this habitat must not be allowed.
A matter of deep concern is that much of the proposed Project lies within the Sharavathy Valley Lion-tailed Macaque (LTM) Wildlife Sanctuary. The sanctuary is characterized by evergreen and semi-evergreen forests and is home to diverse flora and fauna. The Lion-tailed macaque (LTM), endemic to the Western Ghats is an endangered species. The largest surviving population of it is in the Sharavathy Valley LTM Sanctuary. Fragmentation of its habitat has the risk of causing its extinction.
The Western Ghats are the water tower for all the rivers of peninsular India. Further their carbon sequestration potential far exceeds the total carbon emission of all the thermal power plants in Karnataka. Since 4.7 times the required pumped storage capacity is in the environmental clearance pipeline, the Sharavathy Valley PSP is redundant.
The state and national wildlife boards, tasked with protecting wildlife that enjoy the highest protection under the law, must not clear projects that are detrimental to wildlife. However, we are given to understand that the state and national wildlife boards have ignored the site inspection report done by a scientist of the Karnataka state wildlife board and have given a predetermined in-principle approval for the project. In order to safeguard the Western Ghats, it is imperative that the Wildlife (Protection) Act, the Forest (Conservation) Act, the Environment (Protection) Act, and the EIA Notification, 2006 are fully upheld in letter and spirit, while ensuring that the provisions of related legislations like the Forest Rights Act, are also duly implemented.
As per information in the public domain, in May, 2025; Praneetha Paul, the Deputy Inspector General of Forests, MoEF & CC Regional Office, submitted a report[1], listing numerous reasons for rejecting the project, after visiting the area where the work is proposed. Concerns she raised include felling of over 15,000 trees in a dense forest whose canopy was essential for the survival of the LTMs, further fragmentation and isolation of LTMs; the slope cuts, blasting, drilling and tree felling, that would make the area vulnerable to landslides. "The project can be disastrous not only to the ecology of the area but also to human habitations in the area," her report noted.
The officer stated that the KPCL and the state government have failed to provide full details of the project. The project does not clearly state the modus operandi of power evacuation. The report noted that the existing transmission line from Gerusoppa and Talaguppa appears to be in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980."As the ecological fallout far outweighs the economic benefits that may be accrued by commissioning the project, it is recommended that the project should not be approved," she recommended.[2]
However, the aforesaid report was fully sidelined by Mr. S Senthil Kumar, Deputy Director General of Forests, MoEF & CC, subsequently. In his single-page report, Kumar cited the recommendation of the Karnataka wildlife officers to endorse the project. We demand that that the important recommendations in the Report of the Deputy Inspector General of Forests, MoEF & CC Regional Office, must be duly considered by the central and state government.
There is no need to build new projects in ecologically sensitive sites, especially when other alternatives such as Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), rooftop solar energy systems with decentralised storage, demand side management (including time-of-day tariffs) exist and could be explored, considering all other factors.
Multiple experts have pointed out that the Sharavathy PSP is not only ecologically unsustainable, but also economically unviable, and power generation through the PSP may end up consuming more power than generating. Investing Rs. 10,200 crore rupees of the state exchequer in this Project thus needs a serious review.
It is quite disturbing that objections by the local communities, citizens and environmentalists haven’t been adequately considered in the recently held ‘public hearing’ in September. Infact conducting the hearing without the Detailed Project Report (DPR) and EIA in Kannada itself is questionable, as locals say.
The residents of Gundibail, Marathi Keri, Henni, Hire Henni, and Vadanbail villages of Sagar taluk wrote[3] to the Chief Minister, Siddaramaiah last month appealing to cancel the proposed Sharavati Pumped Storage Project. They stated that earlier they have been repeatedly displaced; first due to the construction of the Linganamakki Project in the 1960s (and were moved to Talakalale village) and later displaced for the second time when the Talakalale reservoir was constructed. It would be a gross travesty to displace them for a third time!
Members of the farmers organization Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha (KRRS) and Harisu Sene have also been protesting[4] in Shivamogga, opposing the Project and urged the State government to drop the same in the interest of the Western Ghats and its rich biodiversity.
On the other hand, there are reports of project related surveys and even drilling being carried out in some areas, in violation of due process. Concerns have also been expressed about potential demographic change in the region, due to large scale involvement of migrant work force during project construction phase and related ecological footprint.
Environmentalists have pointed out that the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Sharavathy PSP has been shoddily done and must be rejected in toto. A Comprehensive critique of the EIA by Karnataka organizations notes:
“The Sharavathi PSP EIA fails not by accident, but by design. It systematically conceals or downplays catastrophic ecological, hydrological, social, and cultural impacts. It makes false factual claims, ignores statutory requirements, and omits critical assessments mandated by the Terms of Reference, the Forest Advisory Committee, and the National Board for Wildlife. Instead of providing a scientific basis for informed decision-making, it reads like a project brochure—prioritizing approval over accuracy. We demand that the government drop this project. Since alternatives for peak power management exist, this project is not indispensable. Building such a project in a wildlife sanctuary is unacceptable”.
The Detailed Critique of the EIA by Karnataka-based organizations has been attached with this letter. However, we list below some of the main lacunae in the EIA:
1. The EIA does not make a convincing case for the indispensability of the project, considering all available alternatives. The section titled “Need for the Project”, only provides a technical description of how the project works, and not a justification of why the Project itself is absolutely necessary.
2. The EIA does not make a proper assessment of the risks involved in hazardous materials management, muck disposal, chemical leachate, drilling and blasting impacts, hydrological changes, landslide susceptibility and seismicity and the impacts on wildlife during the construction phase.
3. The EIA does not provide a single integrated map showing all components, overlaying the boundaries of the LTM Sanctuary, Eco-sensitive Zone, perennial streams, roads to be built during the construction phase and locations of the quarrying and dumping sites.
4. The EIA does not assess the impact of the project on the endangered species such as the Lion-Tailed Macaque, Malabar Civet, endemic amphibians, King Cobra, etc. due to fragmentation of their habitat and due to construction activities.
5. The ‘mitigation plan’ is callous and has vague terms such as 'controlled blasting,' 'anti-poaching surveillance,' and 'afforestation on degraded lands', none of which amounts to adequate protection.
6. The impact of 18,000 tons of industrial explosives (HS Code 3602001, LD50 toxicity 1,510 mg/kg)—explicitly documented in the Form 1 application is entirely omitted from the EIA. This omission constitutes a fundamental breach of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016. The EIA provides no management plans for the muck contaminated with explosive residues. It does not assess the risk of chemical leachates entering the Sharavathy river.
7. The EIA does not assess the impact of sand mining though the proposed quarries fall within the ESZ of the Sharavathi Lion-Tailed Macaque Sanctuary, where all mining is explicitly prohibited under the ESZ Notification of 16th November, 2023.
8. The Karnataka State Natural Disaster Monitoring Centre (KSNDMC) has identified the project site as being moderately to highly susceptible to landslides. Blasting using 18,000 tons of explosives, tunnelling for the 11.6 km long water conducting pipes, quarrying and dumping of muck will certainly increase the chances of landslides. The numerous landslides India has recently witnessed in the Western Ghats and the Himalayan region, causing enormous loss of life and property, must be seen as a warning against further tampering with the landscape of the hills.
9. The EIA records that no monuments of cultural, religious, historical, or archaeological importance are reported in the project area. This is factually incorrect. Two monuments - #1242 Chaturmukh Basti, and # 1243 Inscriptions are located in Nagarbastikeri, Gerusoppa. They are protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (AMASR) Act, 1958, as amended in 2010.
Moreover, there are numerous heritage monuments and inscriptions that are yet to be studied by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in the project area. As per the AMASR Act, each protected monument is surrounded by a Prohibited Area of 100 metres, where construction is not permitted and a Regulated Area extending a minimum of 200 metres where development requires mandatory NOC from the National Monument Authority. Official verification by ASI/NMA is essential before any clearance is considered.
10. The EIA does not assess the cumulative impact of all projects in the Sharavathy basin; though the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) in its 7th meeting held on 30th July, 2025 directed the KPCL to carry out a Cumulative Impact Assessment study and a Carrying Capacity study as part of the EIA report. These are critical requirements for a project of this scale, located in a legally protected and ecologically fragile landscape.
11. Both the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) in its 7th meeting on 30th July 2025 and the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) in its 84th meeting on 26th June, 2025 explicitly noted that the transmission line component must be considered. The Terms of Reference for the EIA also requires assessment of transmission lines. Yet, KPCL makes the false claim that a network of power evacuation lines already exists. A new 400 kV double-circuit bi-lateral line will be required, running approximately 60 km in length and requiring a 100-meter-wide corridor. An RTI response from KPTCL further reveals that this line would necessitate approximately 145 acres of sanctuary and forest land.
12. The Terms of Reference (TOR) require a drainage pattern and catchment map up to the proposed project site. It also mandates a map of the project boundary showing protected areas within a 25 km radius. These maps are absent in the EIA. Clearly, the EIA has not been done with due diligence in spite of the project being located in an ESZ.
In the light of all the aforementioned concerns and critiques, on behalf of the National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ), and the All-India Rivers Forum of NAPM;
Ø We urge the MoEF & CC and its Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) to not grant / recommend environmental, forest and wildlife clearance to the proposed 2000 MW Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project (PSP) on the river Sharavathy. Infact, the Ministry must ensure that no PSPs are located within legally protected areas or in ecologically, geologically, and otherwise sensitive zones of the Western Ghats.
Ø We urge the Chief Minister of Karnataka to immediately dialogue with all those committed to protect the Western Ghats and opposing the Project – including local communities, environmentalists, farmers organizations, even retired Supreme Court Judges and cancel the proposed Project; instead pursue viable alternatives that are ecologically sustainable, economically viable, energy efficient and socially just.
We look forward to a rational, transparent and fair decision from your end.
Sincerely,
1. Soumya Dutta, MAUSAM and NACEJ, New Delhi
2. Medha Patkar, Narmada Bachao Andolan and NAPM, Madhya Pradesh
3. S. P. Ravi, All Kerala River Protection Council, Chalakudy, Kerala
4. Maj Gen (Retd) S. G. Vombatkere, Mysuru, Karnataka
5. Sridhar Anantha, Bengaluru, Karnataka
6. Apoorv Grover, People for Aravalis, New Delhi
7. Rajesh Ramakrishnan, Campaign to Defend Nature and People, Chennai
8. Ramnarayan K, Independent Ecologist, Uttarakhand
9. Malaika M Chawla, Amche Mollem campaign, Goa
10. Neelam Ahluwalia, Founder Member, People for Aravallis, Gurgaon, Haryana
11. Sunil M. Caleb, Independent Researcher, Kolkata
12. Moncy M Thomas, Trivandrum, Kerala
13. Dr. Gabriele Dietrich, Penn Urimay Iyakkam, Madurai, Tamil Nadu
14. Dr. Suhas Kolhekar, NAPM, Maharashtra
15. Meera Sanghamitra, NACEJ Telangana
and other members of National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ), and All-India Rivers Forum of NAPM
Contact for details: E-mail: nacej...@gmail.com
[2] https://www.deccanherald.com/india/karnataka/bengaluru/moef-fissures-may-boost-sharavathi-hydel-project-3559905
NACEJ members across India are grassroots movement activists, ecologists, climate scientists, environmental researchers and lawyers, working to address Climate Crisis, through an Ecological and Social Justice Approach, upholding human rights and co-existence of all species.