Expert Panel Recommends Against Rs 10,000 Crore Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project Inside Wildlife Sanctuary

Kaustav Chowdhury
Jul 12
4 min read

A three-member expert committee constituted by the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) has recommended against the proposed 2,000 MW Sharavathi pumped storage hydroelectric project, which was planned to be constructed inside the Sharavathi Valley Lion-Tailed Macaque Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka. The project, estimated to cost Rs 10,000 crore, has now faced a significant setback after the expert panel's report was submitted to the Karnataka High Court by Additional Solicitor General K. Aravind Kamath.

The PIL and the Court's Intervention

The matter came before the Karnataka High Court through a Public Interest Litigation titled Akhilesh Chipli vs Union of India. The PIL challenged the proposed project on environmental grounds, arguing that constructing a large-scale hydroelectric facility within a designated wildlife sanctuary would cause irreversible ecological damage. The petition specifically raised concerns about the impact on the lion-tailed macaque, an endangered primate species that the sanctuary was established to protect.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha has been hearing the matter. The Court's involvement led to the NBWL constituting a three-member expert committee to independently assess the project's viability and its potential impact on the sanctuary's ecology.

The Expert Committee's Findings

The expert committee's report raised several critical objections to the project. First, and perhaps most damaging for the project proponent, the committee found that the Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) had concealed material facts during the approval process. This finding of concealment is significant because it undermines the integrity of the entire application process and suggests that the environmental clearances, had they been granted, would have been based on incomplete or misleading information.

Second, the committee addressed the fundamental nature of pumped storage hydroelectric technology. A pumped storage project does not generate new electricity in net terms; instead, it facilitates temporal shifting of electricity by pumping water to a higher reservoir during off-peak hours and releasing it to generate power during peak demand. The committee noted that this characteristic meant the project's claimed benefits needed to be weighed against its environmental costs more carefully than a conventional power generation project, since the net energy addition to the grid would be negligible after accounting for pumping losses.

The Wildlife Sanctuary and Its Ecological Significance

The Sharavathi Valley Lion-Tailed Macaque Wildlife Sanctuary, located across the districts of Shivamogga and Uttara Kannada, is a critical habitat for the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus), one of the most endangered primates in the world. The sanctuary was specifically notified to protect this species and its habitat, which consists of tropical wet evergreen forests in the Western Ghats. The Western Ghats themselves are recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site and one of the world's eight hottest biodiversity hotspots.

Construction of a 2,000 MW pumped storage project within the sanctuary would involve significant civil construction, including upper and lower reservoirs, underground powerhouses, water conveyance tunnels, and associated infrastructure such as roads and transmission lines. The expert committee concluded that the scale of construction activity and the permanent alteration of the landscape would be incompatible with the sanctuary's conservation objectives.

Legal Framework: Wildlife Protection and Infrastructure Development

Under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, no construction or development activity can be undertaken within a wildlife sanctuary without the prior approval of the NBWL and the Supreme Court (in certain cases). Section 29 of the Act prohibits the destruction or exploitation of wildlife within a sanctuary without a permit. The requirement for NBWL clearance for activities in wildlife sanctuaries derives from the Supreme Court's standing order in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (WP 337/1995, order dated May 9, 2002), not from Section 35(6), which applies specifically to national parks. The legal threshold for permitting development within a sanctuary is intentionally high, reflecting the legislative intent to treat these areas as zones of maximum ecological protection.

The expert committee's recommendation against the project is not legally binding, but it carries substantial persuasive weight. The NBWL, which constituted the committee, will consider the report before taking a final decision. Given the strength of the committee's findings, particularly the concealment of facts by KPCL and the negligible net energy benefit, it would be difficult for the NBWL to approve the project without adequate justification.

Implications for Pumped Storage Projects in Ecologically Sensitive Areas

India has ambitious plans for pumped storage hydroelectric capacity as part of its energy transition strategy. Pumped storage projects serve as large-scale energy storage solutions that can help balance intermittent renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. However, many of the geologically and hydrologically suitable sites for such projects are located in ecologically sensitive areas, creating a fundamental tension between energy infrastructure development and environmental conservation.

The Sharavathi expert committee's report may set a precedent for how such conflicts are resolved. By emphasizing that pumped storage merely shifts electricity generation temporally rather than adding net capacity, the committee has provided a framework for evaluating whether the environmental costs of a specific project are justified by its actual energy benefits. This cost-benefit analysis, rather than a blanket approval or rejection of pumped storage technology, represents a nuanced approach that could influence future project assessments.

Key Takeaways

1. The NBWL's three-member expert committee has recommended against the 2,000 MW Sharavathi pumped storage project, estimated at Rs 10,000 crore, proposed within the Sharavathi Valley Lion-Tailed Macaque Wildlife Sanctuary. 2. The committee found that KPCL concealed material facts during the approval process, undermining the integrity of the project's environmental clearance applications. 3. The report highlights that pumped storage technology facilitates temporal shifting of electricity rather than net addition to generation capacity, weakening the justification for ecological disruption. 4. The matter is before the Karnataka High Court (CJ Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha) in a PIL filed by Akhilesh Chipli, with the ASG submitting the expert committee's report. 5. The ruling may influence how future pumped storage and large infrastructure projects within ecologically sensitive areas are evaluated, particularly regarding the cost-benefit analysis of energy storage versus conservation.