The UPA government’s assurance to the Supreme Court that a panel led by noted environmentalist RK Pachauri would look at an alternate alignment for the Sethusamudram project is a positive step. The measure is likely to reassure groups that oppose the project over a matter of faith. But faith has been one of the grounds for opposition to the project and certainly not the only issue. There are many apprehensions about the project’s feasibility. The Pachauri panel’s jurisdiction, therefore, must be extended to include economic, social and environmental aspects. In these times of rising inflation and high interest rates, will the project be viable if the alignments are altered? The costs are also likely to escalate under a changed scenario. These include not just the capital costs but also the costs incurred during the operation and maintenance of the project. One also has take into account that the changed alignment may affect the fragile aquatic ecosystem adjacent to a marine reserve and the livelihood of fishermen in the area. The area is the habitat of sensitive species, such as sea fan, sponges, pearl oysters, chanks, holothuroids and marine algae. Rare and endangered species like sea cows and sea turtles are also found here. Bringing any permanent harm to endangered species is a crime under the Wildlife (Protection) Act and the government certainly can’t gloss over it. The high rate of sedimentation in the area has to be factored in too while assessing the project.
The British submitted nine proposals for the construction of a shipping channel connecting the West Coast and the East Coast between 1862 and 1922. But they were rejected after careful consideration. Now, the impertinent demands of a persistent ally should not force the government to make any hasty move. The Pachauri panel, therefore, should figure out if this gift to the nation would turn out to be a cash cow or a Trojan horse.