A glacier broke off in Uttarakhand's Joshimath in 2021 .(Picture Credits: IANS)
Joshimath in Uttarakhand is facing the worst land subsidence in its history and experts say the reasons are multiple, ranging from rampant infrastructure development to fragile ecosystem and seismic zone. But, at the centre of all the discussion and debate of the 'sinking Joshimath' story is the Tapovan Vishnugad hydroelectric power project, which is being built by state-run NTPC Limited.
Construction of this 520 MW hydroelectric power (HEP) project began in 2006 and was scheduled to be completed in March 2013. But, almost 10 years later, the project is still 'under construction'. Besides, the project has also undergone a major cost escalation from the initial approved investment of Rs 2,978.5 crore to now an anticipated Rs 7,103 crore, which is an increase of 138.4 percent. In between, the cost of the project was revised to Rs 5,867.38 crore.
The Tapovan Vishnugad HEP project has had a chequered history, which also is partially the reason for its delay. On February 7, 2021, the entire Chamoli district of Uttarakhand, which also houses Joshimath, was hit by unprecedented floods caused by an avalanche, damaging two hydropower projects and leaving more than 200 people dead or missing. One of the two HEP projects was Tapovan Vishnugad, while the other was Rishiganga HEP project. Both the projects were majorly damaged during the floods.
After the Chamoli disaster, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) in a report pointed to inadequate prevention and mitigation measures for hydroelectric power projects during the construction stage. The apex disaster management authority also found that there was “no functional early warning system” in the region. Now, the project only has a manual flood warning system. On December 27 last year, the power ministry said it tied up with Defence Research and Development Organisation for implementation of an early warning system at vulnerable HEP projects.
Prior to that, the project was rocked by the Kedarnath flood in 2013 that killed at least 5,000 people and damaged about 10 hydroelectric projects, including Tapovan Vishnugad.
Coming to the present day, hundreds of houses in Joshimath are in the midst of collapse as the land in the region is sinking, which is called subsidence. Residents in the region and several experts say that the HEP project worsened or accelerated the subsidence in Joshimath as it disturbed the fragile ecosystem of the area. As the situation worsened from January 3, two days later, on January 5, the government stopped all works at NTPC’s Tapovan Vishnugad project.
However, NTPC said the tunnel of its Tapovan Vishnugad hydel project has nothing to do with the landslide happening in Joshimath. “NTPC wants to inform with full responsibility that the tunnel has nothing to do with the landslide happening in Joshimath city. In such an odd situation, the company expresses its sympathy and sensitivity to the people of Joshimath city,” the power generator said in a statement, dated January 5.
In the past, there have also been petitions in various courts demanding scrapping of the hydroelectric project. In September last year, the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Uttarakhand High Court verdict that had dismissed a petition seeking the cancellation of Tapovan-Vishnugad and Rishi Ganga Hydro Projects in the state.
On January 10, the Supreme Court declined an urgent hearing of the plea relating to the Joshimath sinking incident. A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and PS Narasimha said there are democratically elected institutions to look into the issue, as it posted the hearing for January 16.
“Everything which is important need not come to the apex court. There are democratically elected institutions working on it,” the top court said.
A CONSTANT PUSH FOR HYDROPOWER
But several reports have been overlooked in the past by the government too, experts say. After the Kedarnath flood in 2013, the Supreme Court had halted the construction of hydroelectric power projects in Uttarakhand, pending a review by the environment ministry on the role such projects had played in amplifying the disaster.
A 17-member expert committee, led by environmentalist Ravi Chopra, was set up by the ministry to examine the role of such hydroelectric projects in hilly areas. The Chopra committee concluded that 23 projects would have an “irreversible impact” on the ecology of the region. But private developers working on these projects said they should be allowed to continue as their projects had already been cleared for construction before the Kedarnath tragedy.
Later, the Apex Court formed another committee to examine their case. This committee, led by Vinod Tare of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, also concluded that these projects could have a significant environmental impact.
Despite these two reports, the environment ministry in 2015 set up yet another committee, led by BP Das, who was part of the original committee, but had filed a “dissenting report”. It was this Das committee which finally cleared at least six hydroelectric projects with some changes.
Hydro stations account for about 25 percent of the total installed capacity as against the ideal hydro thermal mix of 40:60, as per the power ministry’s website. The total hydro potential assessed by CEA at 60 percent load factor is 84,044 MW, it states.
Rajneesh Sareen, programme director, sustainable building and habitat programme at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) said early indicators have been ignored or overlooked to a great extent in Uttarakhand. “Corrective actions could have been taken if activated on time. Joshimath is totally out of balance because it cannot meet the carrying capacity, it can’t take the load. The typology of the construction that has happened in the town has been insensitive to the requirements/conditions at hand. This typology is also out of sync with hill architecture norms. Third is contour-based development, which has been missing/overlooked to much extent,” he said.
“Many committee reports highlight that there is some hydrological/ hydro geomorphological shift happening here. These are young mountains. These are areas which should not be stressed,” Sareen said.
