After over a decade of deliberation, a Supreme Court-appointed committee has recommended the approval of five hydroelectric projects (HEPs) on the Ganga and its tributaries in Uttarakhand, citing their national importance despite opposition from the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and the Jal Shakti Ministry. This marks a significant development in the long-standing debate over the balance between renewable energy needs and ecological preservation.
The Supreme Court’s examination of HEPs began in 2013, triggered by the catastrophic Kedarnath floods, which claimed over 5,000 lives. Following the disaster, the Court imposed a moratorium on new HEP clearances, instructing the MoEF to study their environmental impact.
Since then, three committees have been formed to assess these projects. The first, led by environmentalist Ravi Chopra in 2014, linked HEPs to increased disaster risks and advised against 24 proposed projects. A subsequent 2015 panel under IIT-Kanpur’s Vinod Tare found that the six contested projects had prior clearances but posed significant ecological challenges. In 2020, a third committee headed by engineer B.P. Das recommended greenlighting 28 HEPs, but the Centre only approved seven, citing prior investments.
The Somanathan Committee’s Green Light
Amid continued debate, the Supreme Court established a high-level committee in August 2024, chaired by Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan, to reassess the B.P. Das report. On November 8, the panel submitted its findings, endorsing five projects:
•Bowala Nandprayag (300 MW on Alaknanda river)
•Devasri (252 MW on Pinder river)
•Bhyundar Ganga (24.3 MW)
•Jhalakoti (12.5 MW)
•Urgam-II (7.5 MW)
The committee acknowledged potential adverse impacts, including risks of landslides and ecological disruption, but concluded that the benefits outweighed these drawbacks. It emphasized the projects’ importance to national energy needs, noting that there was no definitive evidence linking HEP structures to landslides.
Ministries Voice Concerns
Despite the panel’s recommendations, the Environment and Jal Shakti Ministries have expressed serious reservations. They highlighted the fragile ecology of the region, pointing to recent disasters like the Joshimath land subsidence and Chamoli earthquake, which occurred near project sites. The Jal Shakti Ministry also criticized the B.P. Das report for failing to account for the cumulative impacts of HEPs on major rivers like the Alaknanda, Bhilangana, and Dhauliganga.
Both ministries underscored the vulnerability of the proposed sites, with most falling in landslide-prone areas and high-risk seismic zones (IV and V). Concerns were also raised about glacial lake outburst floods and the projects’ impact on aquatic ecosystems.
Projects Denied Approval
The Somanathan committee rejected 15 other proposed HEPs for various reasons. Seven were deemed too risky due to their proximity to glacial lakes, while the remaining eight were rejected for their significant ecological consequences.
During a hearing on November 13, the Centre sought eight weeks to review the committee’s findings and submit its final decision to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, environmentalists and energy proponents remain at odds, with one side warning of irreversible ecological damage and the other advocating for renewable energy expansion in a power-hungry nation.
As the debate intensifies, the Ganga and its tributaries remain at the heart of a critical balancing act between development and environmental preservation. The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling will not only determine the fate of these projects but also set a precedent for sustainable development in ecologically sensitive regions.
