The ecological and environmental cost of the project

(MainsGS2:Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.)

Context:

• Recently, the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has granted an in-principle (Stage 1) clearance for the diversion of 130.75 sq km of forest in Great Nicobar Island for the mega ₹72,000-crore project that includes a transshipment port, an airport, a power plant and a greenfield township. 

About the project:

• The ‘Holistic Development of Great Nicobar Island’ project aims to develop an international transhipment port of 14.2 mTEU cargo capacity at Galathea Bay along the island’s south-eastern coast, an international airport to support 4,000 passengers during peak hours, a 450 MVA gas and solar-based power plant, and an ecotourism and residential township of about 160 sq km. 
• The government hopes to establish the offices of multinational corporations by clearing about a million trees in the tropical rainforest and destroying large parts of coral reefs.
• NITI Aayog is piloting the project and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation (ANIIDCO) is the implementing agency.

Concerns due to project:

• The island, which is spread over 900 sq km, was declared a biosphere reserve in 1989 and included in the UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme in 2013. 
• More than three-fourth of it is designated as a tribal reserve under The Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Amendment Regulation. 
• The agenda to convert this pristine island into a commercial hub to compete with the international port in Singapore is nothing but ‘ecocide’. 
• This project will also run counter to the rights of vulnerable tribal communities, such as the Nicobarese and Shompen, who have been living in these areas for thousands of years and who depend on the forests for survival.
• The Great Nicobar Island has a population of about 8,000. Once completed, the project is expected to attract more than 3 lakh people, which is equal to the current population of the entire 1,000-km-long island chain. 
• The ecological and environmental cost of this urbanisation project in an area known for its marine and terrestrial biodiversity appears to have been set aside without any serious consideration, thus, it would be a misnomer to call this project as ‘holistic.

Afforestation as a compensation:

• To recommend afforestation as a compensation for the loss of forest in the Great Nicobar Island is farcical. 
• The EIA report says compensatory afforestation will be carried out in Haryana and Madhya Pradesh. 
• Far-field afforestation, that too in areas that have no ecological comparison, makes no sense. 
• The project will end up destroying vast stretches of coral reefs and the report recommends ‘translocation’ of these organisms which are facing an existential threat due to climate change-induced ocean warming. 
• Transplanted corals do not have a high survival rate and are susceptible to bleaching, according to various studies.

Tectonic instability

• Further, the Great Nicobar Island is located close to the epicentre of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake which displaced the seafloor by 10-20m vertically as well as trillions of tonnes of undersea rock. 
• The EIA report itself admits that “Great Nicobar lies in close proximity to the Ring of Fire and the Tsunami of 26 December 2004 is a clear demonstration of how prone it is to severe natural disaster”.
• The coastline of the Great Nicobar Islands, which was raised earlier, sank several meters during the earthquake. 
• Post-earthquake satellite measurements show that the island topography is slowly regaining its original height relative to the sea level. 
• The repeated up and down movement of land in response to such earthquakes makes the Great Nicobar Island unsuitable to be developed as an urban port city, but the EIA report hardly considers the tectonic instability around Great Nicobar.

Conclusion:

• On international fora, India’s leaders and representatives always highlight the country’s role in championing conservation, sustainability, and green development models.
• Growth in terms of GDP makes no sense if it ends up in the irretrievable loss of natural capital, thus, the vision of ‘green developmental model’ becomes the guiding principle for future economic activities.