Palk Bay and Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project. Is ignorance bliss? -- R. Ramesh
In a strange and ironic twist, the Indian government has cleared the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project at the worst possible time, when scientific reports done by Indian establishments and others clearly indicate that the Palk Bay has been left reeling under the excessive stress caused by the December 26 Tsunami. These reports also suggest that the Tsunami has left most of the Bay’s biotic and physical resources partially or fully challenged. Regardless of this fact, the Indian ministry has decided to go ahead with the canal dredging work in three weeks time from now.
More ironically, this work would commence at the Palk Strait - a place least studied by the would-be dredgers or by the organization that had prepared the SSCP technical feasibility report. The estimated quantity to be dredged would be 12 to 13 million cubic meters initially. This amounts to 22 to 26% of the dredging work estimated for the Palk Strait area, or 13.6 to 16 % of the dredging work estimated for the entire project. That means that the first one seventh of the dredging work would be initiated within the next 20 days.
The Drama
The Indian Department of Ocean Development’s (DOD) report on Tsunami damage, published in late March, has documented that the sedimentation rate at the coral reefs around the Pamban Island had increased two-fold during the tsunami. A team of scientists from led by Dr.V.J.Loveson of the Council for Industrial and Scientific Research (CISR) New Delhi, studying placer deposits in the area, says an estimated 40 million tonnes of Titanium alone has been deposited in the entire stretch of 500 kilometre coastline hit by the Tsunami. The Zoological Survey of India’s report talks about the consequences of excessive dumping of silt by the Tsunami on the Palk Bay Bay ecosystem. Independent surveys conducted at Kodiakkarai, in Tamil Nadu, in January have revealed that the sea is now half its depth than what it was prior to the Tsunami.
The Indian government has not thought it important to consider the project’s viability in the light of the above studies. Also, it did not occur to Indian government that these study conclusions indicated that the total amount of material that has to be dredged now would actually be many times higher than the original estimate put forward by the project proponents.
Between 1891 and 1995, the Palk Bay and adjoining regions have witnessed as many as 23 cyclones – which means one cyclone every 4 to 5 years. Studies by Dr Sanil Kumar of India’s National Institute of Oceanography, Goa have indicated that during these cyclones, sediments get dumped in Palk Bay. In addition, the region has witnessed three Tsunamis (1881, 1883, 1941) prior to the current one. All these facts indicate that the amount of dredging that would be necessary would actually be many times higher than the amount estimated by National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur.
This irony came to the forefront in a news report published by The New Indian Express in its March 28, 2005 edition. The report said: “In an official note issued early this month, the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) is said to have questioned risks from aspects such as sedimentation due to cyclonic disturbances and threats due to future natural calamities like the tsunami. These issues had not been covered in the environmental impact assessment by Nagpur-based agency NEERI. Its Director S Devotta told this website's newspaper that his agency had not received the PMO note. However, he agreed that NEERI had not covered the sedimentation issue because ‘we had asked the Tuticorin Port Trust to address this aspect with the help of another agency’’ Devotta also stressed that there was no thought on the possibility of tsunamis in this region when the assessment report had been submitted in August 2004. ‘That is why NEERI did not address a tsunami scenario in its study. After the tsunami, any ocean development project - not just the Sethusamudram project - would have to look into this new aspect,’ he conceded.”(emphasis mine).
So, here is a project, where the very agency which first calculated the amount of sediment to be dredged has now openly accepted that it had not studied the issue of sedimentation. The NEERI has also admitted that it had not considered the post-Tsunami scenario. What its director failed to tell the newspaper was that his agency had also not considered the issue of cyclones that frequent the region every 4 or 5 years. However, the Indian Prime Minister’s Office had raised all these questions in its official press note dated March 8, 2005. With respect to this, The New Indian Express report dated 20 May, 2005 reported: ““However, post-tsunami, the plan landed in fresh difficulties, with the Prime Minister’s office reportedly questioning the environmental impact assessment (EIA) study by National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI). The PMO wanted fresh evaluation, as information about the effects of tsunamis and cyclones on the project had not been factored in and noted there were huge gaps in the current knowledge about sedimentation. Subsequently, a team of experts studied the project and made it clear that Gulf of Mannar would not face any threat from the tsunami in the future and the apprehensions expressed by the PMO were cleared.” (emphasis mine). That makes this drama more interesting! The above-mentioned study by experts that had the power to clear earlier doubts raised by the Indian Prime Minister’s office on the project’s feasibility has been completed in a record time of 13 days (April 1-13). What NEERI was unable to achieve in its two years of study (13.05.2002 to 9.06.2004), this anonymous group of experts had accomplished in a matter of just two weeks! The meaning of the Drama
Post-December 2004, three simulation models by Prof. Steven N. Ward, of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA and Prof. Aditya Riyadi, of Pusat Penelitian Kelautan Institut Teknologi, Bandung, Indonesia, have given a clear picture about the pattern of tsunami wave interaction with Palk Bay. These models have been confirmed correct by the data on tsunami waves received from JASON 1 satellite and also by the various post tsunami field surveys. These simulation models indicate that the northeastern, central, eastern portions of Palk Bay received waves of higher energy and thus these areas remained more turbulent during the Tsunami. This means, the extent of sedimentation and thus the extent of damage to the marine ecosystem in this part of the Bay should have been much higher than the other areas of the Bay. Incidentally, all these areas fall well within Sri Lanka’s territorial waters.
The above said simulation models have also indicated that the waves traveling into the Palk Bay both from north and south have a tendency to travel toward the eastern and central half of the Bay during tsunami. Dr. Usha Natesan of Anna University, Chennai has made a similar observation in 2002 from her study on the role of satellites in monitoring sediment dynamics. As stated earlier, all these areas fall within Sri Lanka’s territorial waters.
The NEERI’s bogus estimate on the amount of dredged material is not the only issue that should concern us. The Technical Feasibility Report (TFR) it had prepared along with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) raises a still more serious issue. It states: ““The costs may face upward revision as it has been observed that in more than 50% of the dredging contract there has been very large cost overruns mainly due to poor soil investigation. Investigations carried out in this study are based on sub-bottom profile except for three borings in Adam’s Bridge and there is apprehension that hard strata will be encountered in Palk Bay/Palk Strait area. If bottom strata turn out to be rock, the dredging costs will change drastically, as blasting might be required.”(Executive Summary, SSCP TFR, NEERI, page XVIII, emphases mine).
Even for its bogus estimate of the amount of dredged material, the NEERI report had not identified specific dumpsites. With respect to this, consider the following assessment: “The total quantity of spoils that would come from capital dredging is supposed to be 81.5 to 88.5 X 106 m3. The quantum of dredged spoil that would come from maintenance dredging is supposed to be 0.1 X 106 m3 / year. Specific dumpsite has been identified only for 8.5 to 9.5 % of the total dredged spoil. Idea about the nature of the dredged spoil is available presently, only for about 38.5 to 40.5 % of the total dredged spoil. No idea exists at the present time on the nature of the dredged spoil that would be generated for 59.5 to 61.5 % of the total dredged material. We do not know the exact dumpsites for about 90.5 to 91.5 % of the dredged material.”
So where would they dump the material they would be dredging 20 days from now? With no consistent answer to this question, the project is getting ready for its launch.
Where would the dredged materials travel during normal times and during the times of cyclones and tsunami? As indicated by the studies of Dr. Usha Natesan, Steven N. Ward and Aditya Riyadi, they would be getting dumped in the Sri Lankan portion of Palk Bay. Blasting, if resorted to in Palk Strait, would sound the final death knell for the Palk Bay ecosystem.
The Tad S Murty puzzle
Dr. Murty is an expatriate Indian who had served as the chief editor of the reputed International Tsunami Journal “Science of Tsunami Hazards” for over two decades. He is considered as one of the leading scientists on tsunami in general and on the tsunamis of the Indian Ocean in particular. The Indian Prime Minister’s office invited him late this January for knowing his views on the establishment of the tsunami warning system for India. As he finished his briefing on the tsunami warning system for India he had something else also to share with the Indian authorities - that was on the proposed alignment of the SSCP with respect to tsunamis that the Indian east coast might be subjected to in the future. “I like this (Sethusamudram) project’, he said, ‘but there is a flaw. The entrance to the channel should be reoriented towards the eastern side. Otherwise, there is a chance that it may create a deepwater route for another devastating tsunami. This may cause huge destruction in Kerala.”
The average speed of the tsunami wave in the deep sea had been calculated to be around 800 to 850 km per hour. However, the speed with which it had moved into Palk Strait was astonishingly slow. It worked out to be just 30 km per hour. For Nagapattinam continental shelf, it was around 200 km per hour. The simulation models of Steven and Aditya point to us that the areas through which the most turbulent waves have entered Palk Bay both from North and South are the areas where the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal is to be located. It is this point that has been of concern for Dr. Murty. When he said Kerala would face destruction, what he actually meant was that drastic consequences were in store for the entire shoreline extending from Dhanushkodi to Ernakulam, and from the Delft Island to Colombo. The steeply placed Palk Bay, it may be inferred from his statement, has actually shielded the above said shoreline from the harsh impact of the Tsunami waves approaching it from Bay of Bengal located in the northeast. The deepwater route of the SSCP has two acute bends in its course. These bends would obstruct the waves gushing through the canal, and thus there would be excessive sedimentation in the upper and lower courses of the canal. The impact of the high-energy waves on the bends would destroy these bends, thus paving way for the waves to enter the central portion of Palk Bay. Sediments carried by these waves would make the central portion of the Bay much shallower. Prior to the Tsunami, it was said that this 78 km stretch in the project would have had an adequate depth of 12 meters. Post-Tsunami, there has been no study on this. And, with a canal that has the potential to transport high-energy waves from north and south during cyclones and tsunamis in place, this area will certainly become a candidate for dredging. This would also increase the amount of turbidity in Palk Bay considerably. With all this, the amount of material that has to be dredged would dramatically increase.
Thus, continued dredging in the total stretch of 152.2 km would become the order of the day. Increased, nonstop, unplanned dredging would destroy a sea having one of the highest levels of primary production in the world.
Conclusion
The SSCP would probably be the only offshore project in the world in which the project planners have committed publicly that they have not considered the high risk factors and would go forward regardless of this fact. Even the worst tsunami that humankind has witnessed was unable to break the pertinent vow of the project proponents to remain ignorant of every environmental parameter capable of destroying the project’s viability.
Instead of concentrating on an analysis of the factors which indicate that the project is unviable, the project proponents have been busy constructing fictional discourses on its potential utility. Of course, the best fiction churned out has been the canal’s apparent ability to contain the threat posed by Sea Tigers led by Col. Soosai. The target of this born-to-win discourse was Congress president Sonia Gandhi, and true to expectations, this has achieved its instantaneous results. This discourse’s fictional force simply blew the realism of the Indian Prime Minister’s office and the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project is now well under way!
For the project proponents, ignorance is bliss. And the Indian external affairs minister Natwar Singh can be expected to make a case for this Orwellian sentence during his visit to Sri Lanka on June 9. It is for Sri Lanka to decide whether it is willing to be part of this fiction?
I thank Mr.Ramesh Gopalakrishnan, London, for his help rendered in editing this article.
http://palkbay.wikia.com/wiki/Is_Ignorance_Bliss%3F
Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project
சேது சமுத்திரம் கப்பல் கால்வாய் திட்டம்
Introduction
Richard B.Cathcart [rbcathcart@msn.com]
Just what reasoning its proponents have for naming this macroproject a "canal" is not obvious. Is it possibly because canals are typically distinguished from natural watercourses by containing slack, or stagnant, [fresh] water with little discernable current? The SSCP ought to be named the SS Channel Project! It is planned to be a navigational channel dredged from the seabed!
There are existing sea level canals (Suez, Corinth, Kiel) that were dug through LAND. The SSCP is an ocean shipping channel excavated from the ocean's bed. Another term for ocean's bed is seafloor, and "floor" has an architectural connotation and derivation as so many geological and geomorphological descriptivist terms do.
History
SSCP idea was allegedly first proposed by "Commander A.D. Taylor" of the Indian Marines sometime circa 1860. Here's a bit more biography of him.
Alfred Dundas Taylor was born 30 August 1825 in England, son of George Ledwell Taylor (1788-1873), a civil architect to the Admiralty in the UK not known to have ever visited India. ADT's last published book was THE INDIA DIRECTORY FOR THE GUIDANCE OF STEAMERS AND SAILING VESSELS (London: Smith Elder, 1891). For sure, ADT retired as Commander of the Indian Navy and died in England in 1898.
So, Alfred Dundas Taylor (1825-1898) is documented history. Most remarkably so far, however, I've found no historical evidence to substantiate the widely made claim that ADT, in 1860, first suggested the SSCP!
Map of the proposed Sethusamudram Shipping Canal ProjectLinks:
Tsunamis and Tropical Cyclones of South India
Palk Bay
Ecological Issues related to SSCP
Our own Panama Canal Palk Bay project has huge positive externalities
Jayantha Gnanakone
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tamilinfodaily/message/542
http://sethusamudram.tamilar.org/
The article with all due respect to India’s politician’s exposes the ignorance in the technical aspects of the SSCP, as the astute politicians of Tamil Nadu and Congress Party display. This Canal project and a billion dollars in investment is based on a pack of lies spread by the highest authorities in India. This is rather disgraceful and a shame. There is no time saving in transiting the canal when one considers the slow speed (7-8 knots) the ships would be required to navigate in the canal, delays for embarking and disembarking of Pilots, other administrative procedures and miscalculated distance. The GOI is very deceptive about actual distances saved. When one does the calculation of distance and time for a trip from Bombay to Madras or Calcutta (which is the coastal shipping) then the time saved is very minimal and might be less than 3 to 4 hours compared to the claim of 24 - 36 hours. The present days ships travel at 14-15 knots and not 8 knots in the high seas. Future ships will travel at 20-25 knots and the modern day container ships will travel much faster. The Navy ships achieve speeds between 30-40 knots.
Any time saved is negated by the costs of transit, which will be approximately $10,000 dollars per ship and more. There would be an Insu! rance Premium when transiting the canal, which is additional, and the canal will be subject to weather and labor delays occasionally.
Further more most of the ships cannot use the canal, which has a draft restriction of 11-12 Metres, which would only permit ships less than 30,000 Tons. All the oil tankers, bulk carriers, and container vessels are precluded from using the canal due to the draft restriction, even if they wished to. Even the coal ships to Tuticorin from the East Coast of India need to navigate around Sri Lanka, which again might not be still any time lost or at best be around 3 hours. Suez and Panama Canal saved 22-29 days and not a few hours. They also accommodated 90 per cent of the ships commercially used. Both canals were surrounded by land and the environmental impact was negligible or non-existent and brought some positive economic activity in Panama, and Egypt.
The losses to the fishing industry would be in hundreds of millions of dollars annu! ally both to Sri Lanka and India. The daily production would be substantially reduced which would also slightly affect the GDP but effectively in hundreds of millions of dollars. The annual catch of fish in Sri Lanka in 2003 was 254,000 tons and in South India it could be even ten times higher. The loss of livelihood among the very poor and weak community like the fisherman of India and Srilanka would be over 500,000-750,000. There are others engaged indirectly in the industry, affected by the drastically reduced catch, and loss in livelihood. The breeding grounds and hatching areas would definitely be severely impacted. Additionally the fauna and flora also would be destroyed together with the bio diversity of the Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar, which is priceless.
Pollution would occur on a daily basis and god forbids if there is an accident or deliberate act of war or terrorism. If an oil tanker is grounded the oil pollution not only would it block the canal for days but will! impact the marine life and beaches and the price tag can be over hundreds of millions of dollars. Destruction and damage to the coral reefs again will have impact on several fronts. Local tourism would be negatively impacted if the beaches become polluted slowly but surely.
Removing 86 Million Cubic meters of deepocean sand including coral reefs will have countless marine life destroyed and their habitats permanently ruined and disturbed. In certain areas there could be serious drilling of hard surface, which NEERI report does not address. Rare marine life might disappear forever from these waters. No proper area has been demarcated for dumping this amount of dredged material.
NEERI report does not address the sedimentation issues, silting possibilities, and under water ocean currents when the canal is constructed. There would be increased turbidity, which was never studied by NEERI. The affect of another TSUNAMI might create change in the water flow, which could sub! merge certain parts of South India and Northern Sri Lanka and during the cyclone season, submerge small islands either temporarily or permanently. Danuskodi is a good example. The possibility that the canal may create a deepwater route for another devastating tsunami is real. This would cause destruction never seen before not only in and around the Palk Bay, but the Gulf of Mannar and beyond. Some say that the impact might go all the way to Kerala. During cyclones and tidal waves “high energy waves” would likely to develop within the canal, causing unforeseen damage to the canal area as well as the regional coast. The amount of dredging estimated has been really understated, considering the heavy inflow of sediments after the Tsunami.
Thus additional dredging in the total stretch of 165 km would become the order of the day. Increased, nonstop, unplanned, unscheduled dredging would destroy a sea having one of the highest levels of primary marine life very unique! in the world. There would be heavy cost overruns, which has not been disclosed at this time.
The salinity of the Jaffna peninsula would be affected and the farmers soon will become bankrupt. There are no studies done at all by NEERI on how all these would be affected and impacted especially in Sri Lanka. GOI needs to safeguard the rights of all the people who might be possibly affected and provide sufficient guarantees and insurance with financial protection immediately and in the future. Otherwise, they could also be subject to class action suits at a later stage and liable for heavy compensation. India should be seriously concerned about the alien tort act actions, brought by Burmese environmentalist against the Burmese government and other multinationals in the USA. This rarely used law forced multinationals and the Burmese government to agree to pay millions of dollars in compensation to the villagers due to the environmental damages caused by the oil pipelines. Shipping Corporation of India being a major shareholder in this project is not only subject to International laws but the more liberal “admiralty laws” where assets of ship owners are easily frozen, ships arrested, in far away foreign ports, by even frivolous claimants. Tuticorin Port Trust the nodal agency for this project and the dredging corporation of India, and all other Port trust corporations are subject to the admiralty laws, and alien tort laws in addition to laws of the Indian constitution. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since multi nationals like Union Carbide literally got away with murder in Bhopal. That will never happen to the people of SOSA and both GOI and GOSL and all the shareholders (Shipping Companies and 6 Port corporations) would be held accountable now or in the future for all the damages to environment and the people. The Tamil foreign minister of Sri Lanka is one of the most experienced and eminent jurist in the world. He is fully awa! re of the ramifications and consequences of violating the Law of the Sea Conventions of the United Nations, and other International Law.
The Law of the Sea regulations of the United Nations mandates that neighboring states need to be consulted and sufficient safeguards and guarantees are provided against losses to commercial and civilian livelihoods. The UN mandated convention rules of 1982 was ratified and signed by both Sri Lanka and India.
There is a school of thought that India is hurriedly pushing this project through the cabinet without proper investigations and consultations with Sri Lanka as a “vote getting exercise” for the Tamil Nadu state elections which is due early next year. If this is the way democracy is practiced by India it is nothing but a shameful act. If India forces Sri Lanka to compromise it’s legal position due to the GOSL’s political and economic weakness, both governments would be equally culpable.
Further more ! GOI is using this canal project to enhance the military and provide Nuclear Submarine base in the canal, with the nuclear fuel supplied by the Koodankulam Nuclear Project. This nuclear facility would produce 40 percent of India's nuclear fuel, and it is no secret that India is developing nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Where would India store such nuclear weapons once it is manufactured near the canal, using the nuclear fuel supplied by nuclear project in nearby Koodankulam. The dangers of war will be greatly impacted for the region if the (SOSA) South of South Asia region is nuclearized and militarized. Would the GOI guarantee the people of SOSA and Sri Lanka that such fears are without foundation and baseless? A statement by DMK or Congress politicians is insufficient and worthless.
The only commercial port in Sri Lanka could also be severely impacted when it is openly declared by the GOI, and SSCP Corporation that after the canal is completed they intend to stop In! dian container cargo being transshipped through Colombo. This would have a big impact on a small country. Mighty powerful nations should display more understanding and compassion to their fragile and weak neighbors already devastated by a 22-year civil war contributed partially by India, and the recent Tsunami. India should not use their economic powers to hurt their neighbors commercially.
There are rules that protect small nations like Sri Lanka in the Law of the Sea Convention regulations. India needs to respect such laws. Finally, if there is no time saved in avoiding the circumnavigation of Sri Lanka due to politicians themselves being mislead or ignorant of the facts, what is the earthly use in the GOI going ahead with the project risking so many sectors, and hurting so many? GOI might as well spend this billion dollars is upgrading the entire minor and major ports, railways and highways infrastructure which would be beneficial to all and will not hurt anyone. That is only 200 million dollars per year, for 5 years, of federal funds in at least 2 states of Tamil Nadu, and Kerala. There is also no gurantee that the SSCP would generate profits for 20 years and the GOI might be forced to keep pumping money in a “white elephant project”. NEERI is not competent to conduct a financial report and commercial viability of the SSCP. Central government manipulating the voting pattern must be certainly against the constitution of India if not in “letter” and or “spirit”. GOI can also assist the poor Sri Lankan fisherman and farmers as well as help them to protect their environment and marine life with some of these funds. It would be criminal to utilize federal funds of India to hurt the poor in Sri Lanka.
SSCP would probably be the only offshore project in the world in which the GOI would go forward with the execution of the project, despite the several warnings of the high risk factors and dangers asso! ciated with the project. What is immediately required is a thorough investigation by a group of independent international oceanographers with the assistance of local professionals from India and Sri Lanka, who would carry out their responsibilities and duties without fear or favor. Thereafter both India and Sri Lanka can decide how best to proceed with this canal project which has severe impact on several fronts for both nations. Since the project mooted 144 years ago has still not begun one more year to take into consideration proper safeguards would not hurt anyone including the voters of Tamil Nadu State elections next year. If GOI decides to bulldoze their way with this project there is no doubt that the Sethusamuderam canal is designed to become a monumental disaster. Jayantha Gnanakone
http://palkbay.wikia.com/wiki/Our_own_Panama_Canal_Palk_Bay_project_has_huge_positive_externalities