An idea delinked from commonsense
An engineer from IIT-Bombay, Himanshu Thakkar is currently the coordinator of South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People (SANDRP) and the editor of Dams, Rivers & People. He has been associated with the water and environment sector for more than 25 years and has worked closely with the World Commission on Dams, the Narmada Bachao Andolan and the Centre for Science and Environment. Rashme Sehgal draws him out on India’s ill-conceived river-linking projects: Prime Minister Modi says interlinking the Ken river (in Madhya Pradesh) to the Betwa (in neighbouring Uttar Pradesh) will help irrigate 1.06 million hectares, provide drinking water to 6.2 million people and generate 130 MW of hydropower and solar energy. Are these valid claims? The Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP) that PM Modi laid the foundation for in December 2024 does not have (valid) forest or wildlife clearances. Let me clarify. Both clearances were on the condition that the hydropower component would be taken out of the protected area. But it hasn’t been done. The hydrological figures remain a state secret and have not been peer reviewed or put out in the public domain. There is absolutely no basis to conclude that Ken has surplus water and Betwa is water-deficient. Worse, the project documents do not even look at far cheaper, quicker, less destructive alternatives. To paraphrase what PM Modi said in the context of the Polavaram dam, politicians think of dams as ATMs. The environmental impact assessment of the project is so shoddy it hasn’t even properly studied the impact on the Panna Tiger Reserve (PTR). When the MoEF (ministry of environment and forests) expert appraisal committee (EAC) on river valley projects refused to clear the project after four meetings, Uma Bharati (then Union water resources minister) threatened a dharna. The ministry then reconstituted the EAC, with S.K. Jain as chairman, and cleared the Ken-Betwa project in its very first meeting in December 2016, overruling the reasons for refusal. The same S.K. Jain went on to become director-general of the project. The forest advisory committee (FAC) and the Supreme Court-appointed central empowered committee (CEC) argued forcefully against the project, but the CEC report was not even considered by the apex court! Senior foresters had warned against building a dam on the Ken and a connecting canal between the two rivers. The Betwa already has seven dams on it and none provide the amount of irrigation water being claimed by the irrigation department. The official minutes of the FAC meeting note that the project will involve felling 46 lakh trees (each of a girth greater than 20 cm) from the forest area alone. This will have a huge hydrological impact, besides adversely impacting the environment, biodiversity and climate of this entire region. But none of these impacts have been properly assessed. The FAC and the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) had recommended the height of the dam be reduced, and all inflows into the dam be released as environment flows in non-monsoon months. It wanted an independent assessment of the claim that there is no alternative for Bundelkhand. The CEC report had conclusively proved that this claim was false. The project was sold with one USP: that it would solve Bundelkhand’s water problem. But from the very beginning, the detailed project report (DPR) showed that the key objective of the project was to facilitate water transport to the upper Betwa basin areas like Raisen and Vidisha. So, the Ken-Betwa project will in fact facilitate export of water out of drought-prone Bundelkhand! The project lays down a plan to irrigate 6.35 lakh hectares of farmland in six districts (three each in MP and UP) at a cost of Rs 45,000 crore, besides providing jobs in construction and tourism.
