The National Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) has been granted "in principle" environmental clearance for the Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project (JNPP)(1), in part by relying on an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that categorized the region as "barren." This assessment has come under heavy scrutiny by scientists and advocates for being "grossly unscientific."(2)  The natural flora and fauna of the region are not only incredibly diverse and often rare, but also support an ecosystem on which native villagers rely to support sustainable agriculture and fisheries.

Scientists have criticized the EIA's omission of the impact of the project on marine life, even in waters that ought to be within the radius of the study.(3)  They state that the project ignores the delicate balance of sea life in a region known for its rare ocean ecology.

The Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) has submitted a detailed biodiversity assessment of the 10 km surrounding the Jaitapur site, which calls it an ecological “hot spot” for marine shell organisms, sea cucumbers, sea anemones, sea urchins and brittle star.(4)(5)  These organisms, as well as all marine life (including the rare local sea otter)(6), are all at risk from the nuclear plant which will require vast amounts (86,40,000 cubic meters)(7) of water each day to cool its reactors. The water used for cooling will be released back out into the sea at roughly 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the receiving water.(7)  Elsewhere around the world, temperature shifts of only 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius have been shown to bleach coral, and after eight weeks of exposure, even kill it.(8)  The effects of this release of coolant water have gone completely unstudied at the JNPP site.

Scientists have exposed many errors in the NPCIL assessments, including relying exclusively on satellite photos taken of the region during its dry season to classify it as "barren."(3)  Life in the plateaus is dependent on the monsoon rains, so the assessment misses a critical period of the year when the plateau is flush with life.

The wider ecosystem of the Madban plateau (site of the JNPP) shows a great variety of life that will be disturbed by the project. The slope of the plateau feeds rainwater into local streams and transfers silt into mudflats along their banks.(6)  These mudflats and the mangroves that grow among them are rich in nutrients that support the local ecosystem.  The creek banks comprise ideal locations for coconut and beetle nut cultivation and habitats for sea otters, amphibians, fishes and birds.  Down-slope from the plateaus, rich flora and tropical evergreen forests populate the land and the rich soils of the valley allow for the cultivation of rice, the Alphonso mango, cashew nuts, jack fruit, and kokam which sustain the numerous local villages within the impact area of the project.(6)(9)  All of these effects are dependent on the plateau where the JNPP will be sited – and yet none of these effects have been studied.

In total, many ecological impacts of the project have gone unmentioned by the EIA, while much more remains to be studied.  Before the plant can begin building, scientists have urged an “ecosystems approach” to studying the effect of the plant on the region, which would incorporate the entire local ecosystem that the plant is built on, and not just the isolated plots of land on which reactors sit.(3)  Not only the ecosystem, but the lives of villagers dependent on it, stands to lose much.

The Ministry of Environment and Forests has required NPCIL to undertake a comprehensive biodiversity conservation plan as one of the terms of being granted environmental clearance. This study must also address how to protect adjoining fisheries and minimize the adverse effects of the plant on flora and fauna. The report is due November 28th, 2011.(1)  NPCIL first letter of intent to commission this study on May 16th.(10)  Although NPCIL is expected to report findings in late August, Jairam Ramesh, the Minister for the Environment, recently insisted the plant will be implemented, before the study had even begun!(11)  Clearly, there is a risk that the government has made this requirement a paper tiger – only pretending to impose responsibilities on NPCIL.

In the absence of strict governmental requirements for NPCIL, activists must speak up to make the government scrap the Jaitapur project!

Sources:
1: Jairam Ramesh, Ministry of Environment and Forests. “NPCIL Jaitapur Power Park.”  28 November 2010.
2: Konkan Bachao Samiti. "Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant (JNPP) - Stop a Disaster in the Making."  21 January 2011. 
3: Dr. P. Tateli. "EIA and EIA of JNPP."  3 December 2010.
4: Bombay Natural History Society, India. "A Preliminary Report: Diversity of Coastal Marine Ecosystems of Maharashtra."  November 2010.
5: http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/press-release-npcil-jaitapur-power-work.pdf
6: Madban Plateau Sept-Oct 2010: powerpoint (KBS folder)
7: National Environmental Engineering Research Institute.  "Environmental Impact Assessment for Proposed Jaitapur Nuclear Power Park: Summary."  September 2010.  p20. 
8: Australian Government: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.  "What is Coral Bleaching?"
[Source]
9: Madhav Gadgil.  "Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg Districts: Summary Report of the Maharashtra Government Consultation, 30th September and Study Tour, 4th to 11th October, 2010."
10: The Hindu, “Comprehensive Study on the impact of Jaitapur nuclear project on flora, fauna.” 23 May 2011.
[Source]
11: The Economic Times. “Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project Will Be Implemented: Jairam Ramesh.”  4 June 2011.
[Source]