shp and eia

8/12/2019 shp and eia

1/5

the classification of small hydro projects can be found in the minsiatry of new andrenewable energy s site.

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy has been vested with the responsibility of

developing Small Hydro Power (SHP) projects up to 25 MW station capacities. Theestimated potential for power generation in the country from such plants is over15,000 MW. Most of the potential is in Himalayan States as river-based projectsand in other States on irrigation canals. The SHP programme is now essentiallyprivate investment driven. Projects are normally economically viable and privatesector is showing lot of interest in investing in SHP projects. The viability of theseprojects improves with increase in the project capacity. The Ministrys aim is that

at least 50% of the potential in the country is harnessed in the next 10 years.

Hydro Power Project Classification

Hydro power projects are generally categorized in two segments i.e. small andlarge hydro. In India, hydro projects up to 25 MW station capacities have beencategorized as Small Hydro Power (SHP) projects. While Ministry of Power,Government of India is responsible for large hydro projects, the mandate for thesubject small hydro power (up to 25 MW) is given to Ministry of New andRenewable Energy. Small hydro power projects are further classified as

Class Station Capacity in kW

Micro Hydro Up to 100

Mini Hydro 101 to 2000

Small Hydro 2001 to 25000

Small Hydro Power Programme


2/5

Small Hydro Power ( SHP) Programme is one of the thrust areas of powergeneration from renewable in the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy. It has

been recognized that small hydropower projects can play a critical role inimproving the overall energy scenario of the country and in particular for remoteand inaccessible areas. The Ministry is encouraging development of small hydroprojects both in the public as well as private sector. Equal attention is being paidto grid-interactive and decentralized projects.

Aim: The Ministrys aim is that the SHP installed capacity should be about 7000

MW by the end of 12th Plan. The focus of the SHP programme is to lower the costof equipment, increase its reliability and set up projects in areas which give themaximum advantage in terms of capacity utilisation.

Potential: An estimated potential of about 15,000 MW of small hydro powerprojects exists in India. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy has created adatabase of potential sites of small hydro and 5,415 potential sites with anaggregate capacity of 14,305.47 MW for projects up to 25 MW capacity havebeen identified. 1

Samlll hydro projects in developing countries

1 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/small-hydro/


3/5

Small Hydro, MNRE andenvironmental impacts: Neros

fiddle playing Posted on October 28, 2013 by SANDRP1 Comment Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India recently published a report o n Developmental Impacts and Sustainable Governance Aspects of Renewable Energy Projects . Around the same time, Karnataka High Courtupheld Elephant Task Force s recommendation about impacts of Small Hydro Projects (SHPs) on Elephant habitatsand directed Karnataka Government to review clearances of all such projects affecting elephant habitat s [i] . SHPs arehydel projects between 2 MW-25 MW installed capacity. Looking at the unaddressed impacts of SHPs, such a reportby MNRE was sorely needed and was looked at as a welcome initiative.Unfortunately, the MNRE Report has entirely excluded the small hydel sector from its assessment.

Agitation against 4.5 MW Hul HEP in Himachal Pradesh as it is affecting forests, irrigation channels, mills and drinking watersources of villagers. Source: Sal Ghati Bachao Andolan

SHPs can have and are having severe impacts on communities and ecosystems. They fall under the MNRE and are

exempt from environmental impact assessment, public hearing, and environmental management plan as EIANotification 2006 restricts itself to projects above 25 MW. They get subsidies, tax rebates, tax holidays from theMNRE, apart from other benefits and preferential tariffs from states. Most of the SHP sector is crowded with privateinvestors, wanting to make a quick buck from rivers, without any regulations. The rush is most prominent inUttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Odisha and now Kerala, where cascades of such dams are comingacross pristine rivers.

Despite MNREs supposed intention, most SHPs are not supplying electricity to any remote and inaccessibleareas .[ii] Most projects are grid connected, so the local communities do not get electricity from the projects in theirbackyards, across their rivers which have significant impacts on local water availability, habitat loss, submergenceand fraudulent practices.Following a petition from Western Ghats Forum, Karnataka High Court has ordered a ban on SHPs in WesternGhats, Uttarakhand High Court had cancelled as many as 56 SHPs. In Himachal, communities fought a long andlonely struggle against the 4.5 MW Hul project affecting drinking water security and irrigation of 6 villages, as well as

ancient oak forests. [iii] Projects like 24.75 Kukke I in Dakshin Kannada can submerge a massive 388 hectares,including extremely biodiverse forests, plantations and houses .[iv] Greenkos Perla and Shemburi Project s [v] , Basavanna and Mauneshwara SHPs in Karnataka are examples where two 24.75 MW SHPs are fraudulently shownas separate projects, but are single projects on the same river with a common dam. Maruthi Gen projects, also inKarnataka were not only clubbed together, but also hid their significant impact on forest lan d [vi] . Submergence dataof SHPs is routinely hidden & affected communities are kept in dark till water actually floods their lands.The issues are serious and have been raised by many. As the projects are outside the purview of EIA Notification,none of their impacts are studied; neither do the communities get a platform to record their protests. Hence, a studyon the environmental impacts of renewable energy projects was needed to address these issues.
http://sandrp.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/small-hydro-mnre-and-environmental-impacts-neros-fiddle-playing/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/small-hydro-mnre-and-environmental-impacts-neros-fiddle-playing/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/small-hydro-mnre-and-environmental-impacts-neros-fiddle-playing/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/author/sandrp/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/author/sandrp/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/author/sandrp/http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn1http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn1http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn1http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn2http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn2http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn2http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn3http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn3http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn4http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn4http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn4http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn5http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn5http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn5http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn6http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn6http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn6http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn6http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn5http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn4http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn3http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn2http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn1http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/report-on-developmental-impacts-of-RE.pdfhttp://sandrp.wordpress.com/author/sandrp/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/author/sandrp/http://sandrp.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/small-hydro-mnre-and-environmental-impacts-neros-fiddle-playing/


4/5

Considering these serious aspects, it is very surprising that MNRE Report on impacts of Renewable Energy projectshas chosen not to look at this sector at all. The report does not assess impacts of any such projects, neither does itoffer any recommendations for this sector under MNRE. It only makes a sketchy study of wind and solar energyprojects. T he report makes incorrect statements like: All hydroelectric power projects have to get environmentalclearances which under two categories: category B if capacity of projects is between 50 to 25 MW, effectivelyrefusing to acknowledge hundreds of SHPs, under the purview of MNRE not requiring any environmental regulation.Itstates incorrect facts like There are institutions and processes governing every operational aspect of RE project

development and local institutions, in the form of democratic bodies, to safeguard micro level ecological and socialconcerns. This is patently untrue for SHPs, which are highly unregulated and non -participatory.

The TORs of the study stress assessment of impacts of solar and wind projects, but do not exclude hydel projects.While TORs should have stressed on impacts of SHPs, looking at the number of protests and inherent problems, thatdoes not warrant report writers complete neglect of this sector. Executive Summary states that this study has beendone in response to WGEEP and HLWG report recommendations. Despite the fact that WGEEP specifically bannedSHPs in Ecologically Sensitive Zone I, this report has chosen to turn a Nelsons eye to the sector.

Even with regards to solar and wind projects, the report seems inadequate. For primary data, the authors visited 6wind energy farms and 1 solar energy site. At the solar energy site, interaction was exclusively with projectmanagement and engineers. Social and environmental impacts cannot be understood through interviews with projectmanagement alone. While the report documents the devastation around wind energy farms in Maharashtra, it is not

reflected in conclusions and recommendations.

The report is entirely silent on Clean Development Mechanism applications of SHPs, which are routinely full of liesand incorrect information. CDM credits give project additional pocketable profits, while the affected communities getonly unaddressed impacts. Considering the forest land submerged by Small hydel Projects, and their impacts onadaptation and mitigation potential of local communities, they are also problematic from perspective of climatechange.

The report ends with unacceptable conclusions and recommendations, most surprising being: The RE projectdevelopment is regulated by environmental and social governance system. The current regulatory mechanism isstrong No new changes are required in the legal framework or the governance structure to mitigate environmentaland social impacts. It even pushes for a fast channel for quick clearances.

The report says that environmental impacts of RE projects are not significant and social impacts of are notnegative. Report writers need to visit SHPs in Himachal, Uttarakhand and Karnataka where people have lostirrigation channels, water mills, plantations and even lives, when sudden water was released from projects like Perla -Shemburi in Bantwa l[vii] , Karnataka.Sweeping conclusions and recommendations for the entire RE sector is highly problematic, especially when there areseveral examples of unaddressed impacts, which depend on specific site and project.

The report does include some welcome recommendations. These include: siting policy for projects including zonationand increased participation of local communities in planning and decision making about natural resources, affectedby the projects. It recommends issuing clear guidelines such that community welfare is not compromised due to REprojects and about proponents responsibilities in the zone of influence of the RE project. The report recommendszonation of projects in go-green (no objection), go slow and no go areas for RE project development. These need to

be implemented by the MNRE. If the report would have looked at the entire RE sector, it could have made somevaluable observations and recommendations.

There is a very urgent need to bring projects between 1 25 MW under the purview of EIA Notification 2006. Severalrepresentations and evidences later, it is clear that MoEF does not have the will to do so. It was expected that MNREwill raise these issues, but if this report is an indication, MNRE too is not willing to accept the challenges of SHPdevelopment, or regulating the impacts.
http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn7http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn7http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn7http://sandrp.wordpress.com/Users/User/Downloads/MNRE_Report%20crtq%20PD%20x13%20(2).doc#_edn7


5/5

Documents

shp and eia