PCPIR: greens fault decision on public hearing

November 27, 2014 01:06 am | Updated August 02, 2016 06:27 am IST - VISAKHAPATNAM:

E.A.S. Sarma

E.A.S. Sarma

The decision to hold a public hearing at Nakkapalli on December 18 on Visakhapatnam-Kakinada Petroleum Chemical Petrochemical Investment Region (PCPIR) brushing aside the grama sabha resolutions has drawn flak with several activists picking holes in the environment impact assessment study conducted for the project.

The study is nothing but a bunch of lies by distorting facts on status of fragile ecology of the region, allege green activists, who have taken strong objection to complaints lodged against draft master plan. PCPIR is proposed in 610 sq. km in Visakhapatnam and East Godavari districts with an investment of Rs.3.43 lakh crore in 10 years.

“The EIA study has been made by EPTRI, a registered society funded and managed by Andhra Pradesh government. Apparently, EPTRI has a conflict of interest in preparing the EIA report as PCPIR itself is a project undertaken by the government,” former bureaucrat E.A.S. Sarma has told The Hindu .

Questioning the location of PCPIR in an area already exposed to severe pollution, he wondered how the EIA had failed to give details on the types of industries that would come up and the risks associated with it.

The executive summary of EIA report states that there is no scarcity of water for PCPIR.

This is based on ignorance of the water balance projections in the VUDA Master Plan. Even without PCPIR and with Polavaram project coming through, there is already a net water deficit of 200 MGD in the VUDA region, leading to a serious water crisis, he has stated.

Focus on solar energy

While advocating sustainable development, Environment Professor E.U.B. Reddi has said massive investments in PCPIR will affect food security and livelihood of farmers and fishermen.

“It is better to focus on exploring wind, solar and tidal energy without putting stress on fossil fuels and complicating the delicately poised environmental equilibrium,” he says.

The EIA study had suppressed facts on location of fertile lands and archaeologically sensitive sites, and the problem of fish-kill caused by industrial effluents due to apparent reasons, says environmental activist Ganjivarapu Srinivas.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.