NAME: SAKETH MENTA

REG NO:19BBS0194
SUBJECT:EVS

ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES
DA-1
QUESTION-1: WRITE A CASE STUDY ON ANY HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT.
NAME OF THE PROJECT : Sardar Sarovar Dam
LOCATION : Navagam, Gujarat
OPERATOR : Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd

CONFIGURATION : 1450 MW

DESCRIPTION : The Sardar Sarovar Dam is the largest dam

of Narmada Valley Project, is a concrete gravity dam on the Narmada river near
Navagam in Gujarat.
Water by the four states were defined by the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) in 1979.
Under this award, Gujarat was allocated 11,000 Mm³ representing about one-third of the 75 percent
dependable usable annual water flow, and was authorized to implement a project comprising:

• the Sardar Sarovar Dam,

• a 1,200 megawatt (MW) riverbed powerhouse (RBPH),
• a 250 MW canal head powerhouse (CHPH),
• a canal system to irrigate 1.87 m. ha in Gujarat and 70,000 ha in Rajasthan, and
• a water supply system for about 30 million people in the droughtprone areas of Saurashtra
and Kachchh.
On this basis, Gujarat prepared the Sardar Sarovar Project in 1980, which was to be implemented in
various phases over a period of about 20 years. Phase I comprised of: (i) the Sardar Sarovar Dam, (ii)
the RBPH, (iii) the CHPH, (iv) the first 144 km of the main canal up to the Mahi River, and (v) a
network of branch and distribution canals and drainage system to irrigate about 450,000.

The project preparation and organization took a span of four years from identification in the
year 1979 to pre- appraisal in 1983. It was completed by Narmada Planning group with
assistance from the United Nation Development Program (UNDP). The Narmada Development
Department that was in charge of implementing the project had prepared the detail designs
and cost estimates of the project. Later in the year may 1988, responsibility for the
implementation of the project was transferred from the Narmada Development Department, a
government agency, to the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. (SSNNL), a parastatal
corporation organized along functional lines.
The Bank and borrowers reviewed the basic hydrological data
used for the project design and gave a satisfactory report. The Narmada Water Dispute tribunal
had set the annual 75 percent dependable water availability for the project at 28 million acre
feet (MAF) (34,580 Mm³) with 65.2 percent allocated to Madhya Pradesh, 32.1 percent to
Gujarat. 1.8 percent to Rajasthan, and 0.9 percent to Maharashtra project design. The project
vested its first priority to water supply, second to irrigation and the last to power generation. As
per the original design of the project, the Sardar Sarovar dam was to irrigate 17.92 lakh ha land
in Gujrat and 73,000 ha of land in two districts of Rajasthan. The beneficiary states claimed
that in the first phase of command area development, a total of 2.46 lakh ha land of would be
irrigated. At the time of raising the height the height of the dam to 121.92 m, it was estimated
that 3.5 lakh ha of additional land will be brought under irrigation.
IRRIGATION

The Sardar Sarovar Project will provide irrigation facilities to 18.45 lac ha. of land, covering
3112 villages of 73 talukas in 15 districts of Gujarat. It will also irrigate 2,46,000 ha. of land in
the strategic desert districts of Barmer and Jallore in Rajasthan and 37,500 ha. in the tribal hilly
tract of Maharashtra through lift. About 75% of the command area in Gujarat is drought prone
while entire command in Rajasthan is drought prone. Assured water supply will soon make this
area drought proof.
DRINKING WATER SUPPLY

A special allocation of 0.86 MAF of water has been made to provide drinking water to 131
urban centres and 9633 villages (53% of total 18144 villages of Gujarat) within and out-side
command in Gujarat for present population of 28 million and prospective population of over 40
million by the year 2021. All the villages and urban centres of arid region of Saurashtra and
Kachchh and all "no source" villages and the villages affected by salinity and fluoride in North
Gujarat will be benefited. Water supply requirement of several industries will also be met from
the project giving a boost to all-round production

POWER

There are two power houses viz. River Bed Power House and Canal Head Power House with
an installed capacity of 1200 MW and 250 MW respectively. The power would be shared by
three states - Madhya Pradesh - 57%, Maharashtra - 27% and Gujarat 16%. This will provide
a useful peaking power to western grid of the country which has very limited hydel power
production at present. A series of micro hydel power stations are also planned on the branch
canals where convenient falls are available.

FLOOD PROTECTION

It will also provide flood protection to riverine reaches measuring 30,000 ha. covering 210
villages and Bharuch city and a population of 4.0 lac in Gujarat.

WILD LIFE
Wild life sanctuaries viz. "Shoolpaneshewar wild life sanctuary" on left Bank, Wild Ass
Sanctuary in little Rann of Kachchh, Black Buck National Park at Velavadar, Great Indian
Bustard Sanctuary in Kachchh, Nal Sarovar Bird Sanctuary and Alia Bet at the mouth of River
will be benefited.

ADDITIONAL PRODUCTION

SSP would generate electricity. On completion, annual additional agricultural production would
be Rs. 1600 crores, power generation and water supply Rs. 175 crores, aggregating about Rs.
2175 crores every year equivalent to about Rs. 6.0 crores a day.

Benefits to small and marginal Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe farmers would be as under
:

OTHER BENEFITS
Marginal farmers (< 1 ha.) 28.0 %

Small farmers (1 to 2 ha.) 24.4%

Scheduled Tribe 8.7%

Scheduled Caste 9.1%

AGAINST ONE TRIBAL DISPLACED, 7 TRIBALS WOULD GET

BENEFITS

In addition, there will be benefits of fisheries development, recreational facilities, water supply
for industries, agro industrial development, protection of conserved forest from grazers and
secondary benefits viz employment generation, increase in vegetal cover in 3.4 M. Ham. of
GCA, gains due to compensatory forest, tree plantation 100 times and Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
fixation to large extent by 70 times.
 Dams are built worldwide to store water for irrigation, flood control, and to generate
electricity. However, there are some negative environmental effects of building large
hydroelectric dams. These affects are as follow:

• Siltation Issue - Apart from directly reducing water storage capacity, siltation also decreases
water capacity due to increased evaporation loss. As a result, the capacity to generate hydropower
is affected. A dam choked with silt creates a river prone to risky situations of potential flooding in
the backwaters.
• Rehabilitation issue - Compensation to the displaced, when given, has often come in the form
of land unsuitable for farming or living, located either on riverbed at the risk of flooding, or in rocky
areas which cannot be ploughed. Resettlement sites lack basic facilities: no wells, drinking water
pipelines, or grazing land for cattle, let alone schools or road facilities.
• Bio-diversity challenge - Once the dam is constructed flow of water is reduced in the river. This
creates challenge for habitat and biodiversity on downstream course of the river. The Narmada
valley is biodiversity rich. The dams along the Narmada have changed this, blocking normal water
flow, leading to downstream habitat change and impacting biodiversity. The Narmada estuary,
where the river meets the sea, has become increasingly saline because of the decrease in fresh
water flow after the dams came up. This imposes a cost on society which is not properly reflected
in environment impact assessment report because it is difficult to calculate true cost of damage.
• Other effects - Dams serve as a heat sink, and the water is hotter than the normal river water. This
warm water when released into the river downstream can affect ecosystem; Dams restrict
sediments that are responsible for the fertile lands downstream. Farmers use chemical fertilizers
and pesticides to compensate for the loss in productivity.
Unfortunately, some NGOs and left liberals work against the interest of India. But it was mainly
the failure of previous Congress governments. When the work restarted under Narendra Modi
as chief minister of Gujarat, oppositions to the project were still there. Left liberals along with a
section of media were trying every propaganda to stop this but couldn't stand against a
resolute Modi.

More importantly, this is not a single case. It has been a usual phenomenon where a handful
of biased individuals tried to derail the development project. The Kundankulm nuclear power
plant (KKNPP), Tamil Nadu was facing a similar protest. The project was drawn
in 1988 between the erstwhile Soviet Union and India. It is the largest nuclear power plant of
India to have six units with a total capacity to generate 6,000 MW of electricity (1,000 MW
each). But, till now only 2 units are completed. The protest led by Udayakumar ensured
derailment of a project of such importance. One rough estimate suggests that it can
provide electricity to 20 crores homes. Electricity, Internet and Roads are the pillars of
development for a country like India. Now coming back to SSD project.

Timeline of the Sardar Sarovar Dam (SSD) project:

• The idea which was conceived in 1946 and foundation stone laid in 1961, was
inaugurated in 2017. Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) was created
in 1969 to finalize the share among states and announced its verdict in 1979. The
planning commission finally approved the project in 1988.
• Then Medha Patkar formed ‘Narmada Bachao Andolan’ to stop the project arguing
that it would destroy the ecology of the region and would displace more than 2 lakhs
of people. Due to her protest, World Bank cancelled the loan in 1993 and honorable
Supreme Court stayed the project in 1996. However, in 2000, the Supreme Court
allowed the work to begin.
• Finally the dam was commissioned in 2006, when Narendra Modi was the Chief
Minister of Gujarat. He rightly said on the day of inauguration, “neither i think small
and nor i do small, World Bank or no World Bank, i was determined to do this and it
happened ”.
Western States like Rajasthan, Gujarat and Maharashtra are water deficient. Proper water
supply is essential for drinking water and agriculture. This dam would provide water to the
above mentioned states and Madhya Pradesh and would provide electricity to all mentioned
above except Rajasthan.

As per media reports, when the project was started the cost was INR 5500 crores and after 56
years it completed with a total cost of INR 65000 crores. In this period a lot of opportunities are
lost. If we add up the opportunity cost of the period with the extra investment cost incurred, it
would be more than INR 1 lakh crore. Approximately 1% of the GDP of India, 2015–16. Who
would compensate this loss?

In the name of environment and tribal, a coterie of obstructionists were working against the
development of India for years. But unfortunately all previous governments bowed down
against them.

Very correctly, Modi government has cracked down on those NGOs which are red flagged by
the Intelligence Bureau for alleged misuse of foreign funds and suspected extremist links.
Modi needs at least one more term to clean the system and nail separatists, terrorists, naxals
and anti-national free thinkers.
Modi’s punch line in Varanasi, “The projects started by me, are also completed by me”.
And I would like to add here, “The projects which are started by others are also
completed by you”.

There isn't any hydrological problem as such. Terrain facilitates provision of canals upto the
border area of Rajasthan. As far as irrigation, drinking water and power generation is
concerned, this dam in boon for the beneficiaries.

Rather than blaming the dam, governments concerned shall be blamed for gross negligence
in ensuring honourable rahabilitation of the affected tribal population in the area. The affected
people had only farming, cattle grazing and now submerged forest as the only mean of
sustainance. Reservoir of dam has submerged this complete area which force these people to
relocate in different locality which most of them were not comfortable. Remuneration received
was also very low and most of them were exploited due to illiteracy and lack of economic
prowess, which give rise to “Narmada Bachao Andolan” by Medha Patkar. Still many genuine
beneficiaries haven't received due justice and this is the real problem with Sardar Sarovar dam.
Though the project faced severe conflicts and controversies with World Bank lending, ecological
issues and changes in its policies and practices, it did not lead to stopping or significantly scaling
back Sardar Sarovar Dam or the Larger Narmada Project. The success or failure of the SSP
from the point of view of project construction or from the point of view of remedial measures
cannot be analyzed in isolation from what has happened and is happening in the case of other
dams. The SSP offers many lessons and some hope for people affected by other big dams on
the Narmada or elsewhere.
QUESTION-2: WRITE A NOTE ON OZONE DEPLETION AND
GREEN HOUSE EFFECT

A layer in the earth's stratosphere at an altitude of about 10 km (6.2 miles) containing a

high concentration of ozone, which absorbs most of the ultraviolet radiation reaching the earth from the
sun.

Ozone layer depletion:

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other halogenatedozone
depleting substances (ODS) are mainly responsible for man-made chemical ozone depletion.
The total amount of effective halogens (chlorine and bromine) in the stratosphere can be
calculated and are known as the equivalent effective stratospheric chlorine (EESC).
➢ The main cause of ozone depletion and the ozone hole is manufactured chemicals,
especially manufactured halocarbon refrigerants, solvents, propellants and foam-blowing
agents (chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), HCFCs, halons), referred to as ozone-depleting
substances (ODS). These compounds are transported into the stratosphere by the winds
after being emitted from the surface.[2] Once in the stratosphere, they release halogen
atoms through photodissociation, which catalyze the breakdown of ozone (O3) into
oxygen (O2).[3] Both types of ozone depletion were observed to increase as emissions of
halocarbons increased.
➢ The main things that lead to destruction of the ozone gas in the ozone layer. Low
temperatures, increase in the level of chlorine and bromine gases in the upper
stratosphere are some of the reasons that leads to ozone layer depletion. But the one
and the most important reason for ozone layer depletion is the production and
emission of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This is what which leads to almost 80 percent
of the total ozone layer depletion.
➢ The main things that lead to destruction of the ozone gas in the ozone layer. Low
temperatures, increase in the level of chlorine and bromine gases in the upper
stratosphere are some of the reasons that leads to ozone layer depletion. But the one
and the most important reason for ozone layer depletion is the production and
 emission of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This is what which leads to almost 80 percent
of the total ozone layer depletion.

EFFECTS OF OZONE LAYER DEPLETION:

➢ The depletion of ozone layer allows entering of UV rays from sun into the earth’s atmosphere
which is associated with a number of health related and environmental issues. Let us see its
major impacts on human beings.

Skin Cancer:
exposure to UV rays from sun can lead to increased risk for developing of several types
of skin cancers. Malignant melanoma, basal and squamous cell carcinoma are the most common
cancers caused by exposure to UV rays.

Eye Damage:
UV rays are harmful for our eyes too. Direct exposure to UV rays can lead to
Cataract problems, and also Photokeratitis or snow blindness.

Damage to Immune system:

our immune system is also highly vulnerable to UV rays. Increased exposure
to UV rays can lead to weakening of the response of immune system and even impairment
of the immune system in extreme cases.

Aging of skin:
exposure to UV rays can lead to acceleration of the aging process of your skin.
This will result in you looking older than what you actually are. It can also lead to photo allergy that
result in outbreak of rashes in fair skinned people.

In humans:
 exposure to UV rays can also lead to difficulty in breathing, chest pain, and
throat irritation and can even lead to hampering of lung function.
• UV rays affect other life forms too. It adversely affects the different species of amphibians
and is one of the prime reasons for the declining numbers of the amphibian species. It affects
them in every stage of their life cycle; from hampering the growth and development in the
larvae stage, deformities and decreases immunities in some species and to even retinal
damage and blindness in some species.
• UV rays also have adverse effect on the marine ecosystem. It adversely affects the
planktons which plays a vital role in the food chain and oceanic carbon cycle. Affecting
phytoplankton will in turn affect the whole ocean ecosystem.
• UV rays will also affect the plants. UV radiations can alter the time of flowering in some plant
species. It can also directly affect the plant growth by altering the physiological and
developmental processes of the plants.

ON ENVIRONMENT:
Ozone layer depletion leads to decrease in ozone in the stratosphere and
increase in ozone present in the lower atmosphere. Presence of ozone in the lower atmosphere is
considered as a pollutant and a greenhouse gas. Ozone in the lower atmosphere contributes to global
warming and climate change. The depletion of ozone layer has trickle down effects in the form of global
warming, which in turn leads to melting of polar ice, which will lead to rising sea levels and climatic
changes around the world.

Ways to bring down ozone layer depletion:

Ozone layer depletion is not something that affects any specific country or region. The whole
world is vulnerable to its after effects. That makes it important for each and every one of us to take
actions to reduce ozone layer depletion. International agreements such as Montreal protocol in 1987
have helped in reducing and controlling industrial emission of Chlofluorocarbons. More and more of
such international agreements between countries is necessary to bring down ozone layer depletion. At
individual level each and everyone also can contribute towards reducing ozone layer depletion. Buying
and using recycled products, saving of energy, using of public transport can do a lot in combating ozone
layer depletion. The most important thing that we can do is spreading awareness. Our individual efforts
will go a long way in saving the earth’s blanket and keep our planet earth liveable for us and our future
generations.
CONCLUSION:
The ozone layer is what saves the Earth and the living organisms from the
harmful radiations of the sun. It is necessary to understand its importance and work to control
the depletion of this layer.

GREEN HOUSE EFFECT:

The trapping of the sun's warmth in a planet's lower atmosphere, due to the
greater transparency of the atmosphere to visible radiation from the sun than to infrared radiation
emitted from the planet's surface.

A gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiation.

Carbon dioxide and chlorofluorocarbons are examples of greenhouse gases.

Examples: carbon dioxide,methane,nitrous oxide,chlorofloro carbon-12 etc…

Greenhouse effect:
Step 1: Solar radiation reaches the Earth's atmosphere - some of this is reflected back into
space.
Step 2: The rest of the sun's energy is absorbed by the land and the oceans, heating the Earth.
Step 3: Heat radiates from Earth towards space.
Step 4: Some of this heat is trapped by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, keeping the
Earth warm enough to sustain life.
Step 5: Human activities such as burning fossil fuels, agriculture and land clearing are
increasing the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.
Step 6: This is trapping extra heat, and causing the Earth's temperature to rise.

Causes of green house effect:

1. Burning of Fossil Fuels: Fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas have become an integral
part of our life. They are used on large basis to produce electricity and for transportation. When they
are burnt, the carbon stored inside them is released which combines with oxygen in the air to create
carbon dioxide. With the increase in the population, the number of vehicles have also increased and
this has resulted in increase in the pollution in the atmosphere. When these vehicles run, they release
carbon dioxide, which is one the main gas responsible for increase in greenhouse effect.
Apart from that, electricity-related emissions are high because we are still dependent on coal for
electricity generation which releases large amount of CO2 into the atmosphere and is still the primary
source of fuel for generating electricity. Although, renewable sources are catching up, but it may take
a while before we can reduce our dependance on coal for electricity generation.

2. Deforestation: Forests hold a major green area on the planet Earth. Plants and trees intake
carbon dioxide and release oxygen, through the process of photosynthesis, which is required by
humans and animals to survive. Large scale development has resulted in cutting down the trees which
has forced people to look for alternate places for living. When the wood is burnt, the stored carbon in
converted back into carbon dioxide.

3. Increase in Population: Over the last few decades, there have been huge increase on
population. Now, this has resulted in increased demand for food, cloth and shelter. New manufacturing
hubs have come up cities and towns that release some harmful gases into the atmosphere which
increases the greenhouse effect. Also, more people means more usage of fossil fuels which in turn has
aggravated the problem.

4. Farming: Nitrous oxide is one the greenhouse gas that is used in fertilizer and contributes to
greenhouse effect which in turn leads to global warming.

5. Industrial Waste and Landfills: Industries which are involved in cement production,
fertilizers, coal mining activities, oil extraction produce harmful greenhouse gases. Also, landfills filled
with garbage produce carbon dioxide and methane gas contributing significantly to greenhouse effect.

EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING:

➢ Worldwide, glaciers are shrinking rapidly at present. Ice appears to be

melting faster than previously estimated. In areas that are dependent on
meltwater from mountain areas, this can cause drought and lack of
domestic water supply.
➢ According to the IPCC, up to a sixth of the world's population lives in areas
that will be affected by meltwater reduction

➢ Worldwide, glaciers are shrinking rapidly at present. Ice appears to be

melting faster than previously estimated. In areas that are dependent on
meltwater from mountain areas, this can cause drought and lack of
domestic water supply.
➢ According to the IPCC, up to a sixth of the world's population lives in areas
that will be affected by meltwater reduction.
 The warmer climate will probably cause more heatwaves,
more violent rainfall and also an increase in the number and/or severity of storms

➢ Sea level rises because of melting ice and snow and because of the thermal
expansion of the sea (water expands when warmed). Areas that are just
above sea level now, may become submerged.
➢ For example, some Pacific Island nations are expected to be partially or
completely submerged by the end of the century. Coastal and shallow
marine plants and animals will be affected, for example mangroves and
coral reefs.
➢ In countries with large areas of coastal lowland there will be a dual risk of
river floods and coastal flooding, which will reduce the area for living and
working. Coastal defences will need to be strengthened, and river levees
will need to be developed. The increase in standing water may allow more
insects like mosquitoes and diseases spread by insects, such as Lyme’s
disease.
➢ The most recent meetings of scientists (2009 Climate Change Summit,
Copenhagen suggest that the consequences of increase in temperature
caused by the greenhouse effect may be more severe than were previously
thought.
WAYS TO PREVENT GREEN HOUSE GASES:

Buying products with minimal packaging will help to reduce

waste. By recycling half of your household waste, you can save
2,400 pounds of carbon dioxide annually.

Adding insulation to your walls and installing weather stripping

or caulking around doors and windows can lower your heating
costs more than 25 percent, by reducing the amount of energy
you need to heat and cool your home. Turn down the heat while
you’re sleeping at night or away during the day, and keep
temperatures moderate at all times. Install a programmable
thermostat because setting it just 2 degrees lower in winter and
higher in summer could save about 2,000 pounds of carbon
dioxide each year.

Wherever practical, replace regular light bulbs with compact florescent

light (CFL) bulbs. Replacing just one 60-watt incandescent light bulb
with a CFL will save you $30 over the life of the bulb. CFLs also last
10 times longer than incandescent bulbs, use two-thirds less energy,
and give off 70 percent less heat. If every Canadian family replaced
one regular light bulb with a CFL, it would eliminate 90 billion pounds
of greenhouse gases, the same as taking 7.5 million cars off the road.

Less driving means fewer emissions. Besides saving gasoline, walking and
biking are great forms of exercise. Explore the York Region Transit system
and check out options for carpooling to work or school.
When you do drive, make sure your car is running efficiently. For example,
keeping your tires properly inflated can improve your gas mileage by more
than 3 percent. Every gallon of gas you save not only helps your budget, it
also keeps 20 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
Home appliances now come in a range of energy-efficient models,
and compact florescent bulbs are designed to provide more natural-
looking light while using far less energy than standard light bulbs.

Set your water heater at 120 degrees to save energy, and wrap it
in an insulating blanket if it is more than 15 years old. Buy low-
flow showerheads to save hot water and about 350 pounds of
carbon dioxide yearly. Wash your clothes in warm or cold water to
reduce your use of hot water and the energy required to produce
it. That change alone can save at least 500 pounds of carbon
dioxide annually in most households.

Save electricity and reduce global warming by turning off lights

when you leave a room, and using only as much light as you
need. And remember to turn off your television, stereo and
computer when you're not using them. It’s also a good idea to
turn off the water when you’re not using it. While brushing your
teeth, shampooing the dog or washing your car, turn off the
water until you actually need it for rinsing.

If you have the means to plant a tree, start digging. Trees

absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. A single tree will
absorb approximately one ton of carbon dioxide during its
lifetime.
QUESTION-3: WRITE A CASE STUDY ON
BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY.
BHOPAL GAS strategy:

Often named as the world’s worst industrial disaster, the Bhopal Gas Tragedy has been
the focus of many research papers, articles, documentaries, debates and disputes. This
project attempts to report and analyze the development of environmental policy in India
after the Bhopal Gas tragedy. This contains the details about the disaster and its immediate
consequences and also deals with the litigation involved in the determination of
compensation.examines the probable causes of the disaster explaining the role of the
corporation as well as the state.it briefly discusses the standards that were already in place
before the disaster and then describes the different changes initiated as a response to the
disaster. Finally, the project concludes by mentioning the lessons learnt from the disaster.
The disaster
In 1970, the American enterprise, Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) established a
pesticide plant in the densely populated region on Bhopal due to its central location and
transportation network. The specific site within the city was to be utilized for light industrial
and commercial activities and not hazardous industries. In 1984, the plant was
manufacturing Selvin at one-quarter of its capacity due to decreased demand of the
pesticide. Due to the decreased productivity, UCIL made plans to dismantle the key
production units and transport it to another country. In the meantime, the plant kept up
production but due to low profits, safety standards were the lowest priority. Although the
local government was aware of the lower standards, it was reluctant to impose strict
controls on a struggling industry, which was also a large employer.

At around 1:00 pm on December 3, 1984, massive amounts of Methyl isocyanide quickly

engulfed the city. Within hours, a large number of humans and animals died due to inhaling
the poisonous gas. According to an estimate, around 3787 people died immediately. Local
hospitals were packed with clueless patients and doctors alike. In the first few days, the
death count reached 10,000 followed by 15,000 to 20,000 premature deaths in the
subsequent decade. A large proportion of people who survived suffered from acute multi-
system morbidities with the eyes and lungs being the target organs. The ICMR estimated
that approx. 62.58% of the population of Bhopal suffered from inhalational toxicity. The
population that survived developed morbidity of varying degree over the next 25 years.

When the hospitals started receiving patients, they had no idea about what was affecting
them and the treatment that would be necessary. The doctors still do not know about the
toxin or its antidote. The problem could have been more efficiently handled if the
government had more information. UCC refused to divulge any information about the exact
composition of the leaked gases citing trade secrecy as an excuse, which forced the
treatment to be symptomatic.
HOW DID IT START
To produce Pesticide Sevin with an intermediate methyl isocyanate (MIC). It
necessitated the start up of MIC production plant in 1979.

• Following production continued ,ironically during the night of December 2–3, 1984,
water entered Tank E610 containing 40 tons of MIC.

• The resulting in exothermic reaction which increased the temperature inside the
tank to over 200 C(392 F) and raised the pressure. About 30 metric tons of methyl
isocyanate (MIC) escaped from the tank into the atmosphere, which got added to a
weak wind which frequently changed direction, which in turn helped the gas to cover
more area in a shorter period of time (about one hour).

This weak wind and the weak vertical turbulence caused a slow dilution of gas and
thus allowed the poisonous gas to spread over considerable distances.
WHAT FACTORS LEAD TO THE MAGNITUDE OF GAS LEAK??

Storing MIC in large tanks and filling beyond recommended levels.

• The flare tower and several vent gas scrubbers had been out of service for five
months before the disaster.

• Failure of several safety systems .

• Also some safety systems being switched off to save money, including the MIC
tank refrigeration the MIC was kept at 20 degrees Celsius, not the 4.5 degrees
advised by the manual.

• There was only one manual back-up system, compared to a four-stage system
used by union carbide plant of USA.

• Lack of skilled operators-No proper training was given to them.

WHAT COULD HAD BEEN DONE TO AVOID THE DISASTER

• Supervisor could have been placed on night shifts and the readings and feedback

of the Equipment could have been taken for every one hour.

• There should have been 4 stage back up system (union carbide plant of USA)

instead of a one manual back up system.

• At regular intervals proper maintenance and servicing of Flare towers, pressure

valves, gas scrubbers must have be made.

• Strict regulations and methods must have been used according to the manual.

• Proper pressure gauges should have been used.

The consequences
• After the incident, UCC started distancing itself from its Indian subsidiary intending
to evade liability by transferring the blame to UCIL. The operations at the plant were
discontinued.

• The gas leak claimed the lives of thousands of people, animals and carried over its
devastating effects to the next generations.

• People suffered from various ocular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, reproductive and

neurological disorders. Among the injured were pregnant women who experienced
abortions, had premature delivery and gave birth to infants with fetal abnormalities.

• The injury was also inflicted on the environment. Even after the death of so many
people, the corporation refused to take active responsibility and restore the healthy
 environment. During the company’s production years, it dumped huge amounts of
toxic waste outside and inside the plant site.

• Almost 350 tons of toxic waste and residue of old pesticides still remain at the plant
site. These wastes degrade slowly and pollute the soil and groundwater. This
threatens a larger number of people and will keep spreading unless it is properly
disposed of.

• In May 1999, Greenpeace collected soil and water samples from the site and found
that the water and soil and breast milk contamination is toxic to humans.

Litigation
The government, observing the increasing number of cases in courts, promulgated the
Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 (the Bhopal Act) on 29 March
1985. The Bhopal Act gave the Central government the exclusive right to represent and act
(in India or overseas) on the behalf of the persons entitled to make claims in relation to the
Bhopal gas leak. It gave authority to the Central government to represent the interests of
those affected by the gas leak as ‘parens patriae’. The government-owned stakes at UCIL,
which would make it partially liable for the tragedy. This action of the government was
criticised as a way to evade responsibility by stopping the victims to initiate action against
the state. This act was challenged before the Supreme Court which justified the act and
held it to be valid.

The central government filed a complaint against UCC before Southern District Court of
New York, USA, where it argued the inability of the Indian Courts to deal effectively with
the situation and that the matter should be dealt with in US courts. The company, however,
pushed for the matter to be dealt with in Indian Courts, knowing that the compensation is
likely to be higher in the US courts. The court dismissed the claims on the grounds of forum
non-conveniens.

The government’s original claim involved a compensation of 3 billion USD but the company
agreed to the mere sum of 470 million USD. The sum is grossly inadequate for people who
lost their family or are permanently disabled.
Causes
It seems that the UCIL was trying to minimize cost by compromising with the health
and safety standards. There is no sensitivity towards the environment or the
wellbeing of the locals residing around the plant. The loss could have been
significantly less if only UCC had a crisis management plan. Instead, the plant
focused on evading liability, withholding information and ignoring the impact. It
accepted moral responsibility but denied legal liability

UCC admitted in their own investigation report that most of the safety systems
were not functioning on the night of the 3rd December 1984
· Tank temperatures were not logged;
· The vent gas scrubber (VGS) was not in use;
· The cooling system was not in use;
· A slip bind was not used when the pipes were washed;
· The concentration of chloroform in Tank 610 was too high;
· The tank was not pressurised;
· Iron was present because of corrosion;
· The tank’s high-temperature alarm was not functioning;
· Tank 619 (the evacuation tank) was not empty.

Steps taken after the disaster

It is a sad truth that such a tragic incident had to happen for us to realise the
importance of safety standards.

In response to the disaster, the government brought forth various

legislations. This marked the shift in the consciousness with regard to
environmental issues. The legislative developments are outlined below.

➢ The Environment Protection Act was enacted in 1986. The act defines
the environment and authorizes the central government to take all
such measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purposes
of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and
preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution. In this
connection, the central government has the authority to issue direct
written orders including orders to close, prohibit, or regulate any
industry, operation or process or to stop or regulate the supply of
electricity, water or any other service. The act conforms to the
commitments made by the Stockholm Declaration, 1972.
CONCLUSION
India is a developing nation and hence is open to foreign investors so as to
induce growth in its economy. Industrialization is encouraged in order to be
globalised. However, we should not lose sight of the effect these industries
have in the long run on the environment and the health of the people. India
needs to rigid when it comes to enforcement of the legislation in place so
that we do not pay such a heavy price again. UCIL got away with such
blatant violations because the enforcement was too weak to serve as a
deterrent.
Are human lives in India so disposable that we are ready to pass off the
incident as an unfortunate accident? There is no way to replace the
thousands of lives lost all that can be done is to ensure that the ones that
have been left behind can lead a comfortable life and cope up with the loss.
The industrial disaster catalyzed a paradigm shift in terms of environmental
awareness, environmental policy, judicial activism and human rights. It
forced the government and public alike to treat these issues with utmost
priority.
QUESTION-4: WRITE A CASE STUDY ON FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI
NUCLEAR DISASTER.

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear disaster-A:

Fukushima accident, also called Fukushima nuclear

accident or Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, accident in 2011 at the
Fukushima Daiichi (“Number One”) plant in northern Japan, the
second worst nuclear accident in the history of nuclear
power generation. The site is on Japan’s Pacific coast, in
northeastern Fukushima prefecture about 100 km (60 miles) south
of Sendai. The facility, operated by the Tokyo Electric and Power
Company (TEPCO), was made up of six boiling-
water reactors constructed between 1971 and 1979. At the time of the
accident, only reactors 1–3 were operational, and reactor 4 served as
temporary storage for spent fuel rods.
Cause:
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster was an energy accident at
the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Ōkuma, Fukushima Prefecture,
initiated primarily by the tsunami following the Tōhoku earthquake on 11 March
2011.

Immediately after the earthquake, the active reactors automatically shut

down their sustained fission reactions. However, the ensuing tsunami disabled
the emergency generators that would have provided power to control and operate
the pumps necessary to cool the reactors.

The insufficient cooling led to three nuclear meltdowns, hydrogen-air explosions,

and the release of radioactive material in Units 1, 2 and 3 from 12 to 15 March.

Loss of cooling also raised concerns over the recently loaded spent fuel pool of
Reactor 4, which increased in temperature on 15 March due to the decay heat
from the freshly added spent fuel rods but did not boil down to exposure.
[9]

On 5 July 2012, the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation

Commission(NAIIC) found that the causes of the accident had been foreseeable,
and that the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), had failed
to meet basic safety requirements such as risk assessment, preparing for
containing collateral damage, and developing evacuation plans.

On 12 October 2012, TEPCO admitted for the first time that it had failed to take
necessary measures for fear of inviting lawsuits or protests against its nuclear
plants.

EFFECTS
TSUNAMI AND FLOODING:
The earthquake triggered a 13-to-15-meter (43 to 49 ft)-high tsunami that
arrived approximately 50 minutes later. The waves overtopped the plant's
5.7-meter (19 ft) seawall, flooding the basements of the power plant's
turbine buildings and disabling the emergency diesel generators at
approximately 15:41. TEPCO then notified authorities of a "first-level
emergency".The switching stations that provided power from the three
backup generators located higher on the hillside failed when the building
that housed them flooded. Power for the plant's control systems switched to
batteries designed to provide power for about eight hours. Further batteries
and mobile generators were dispatched to the site, but were delayed by
poor road conditions; the first arrived at 21:00 11 March, almost six hours
after the tsunami struck.

Unsuccessful attempts were made to connect portable generating

equipment to power water pumps. The failure was attributed to flooding at
the connection point in the Turbine Hall basement and the absence of
suitable cables. TEPCO switched its efforts to installing new lines from the
grid. One generator at unit 6 resumed operation on 17 March, while external
power returned to units 5 and 6 only on 20 March.

IMMEDIATE EFFECTS:
As soon as July 9th, 2011, radioactive plume released from the Fukushima nuclear
power plant had reached as far as 2,500 meters above sea level at Mt. Fuji. [4,5]
Thus it can be concluded that the Fukushima radiation plume was large enough to
carry radioactive material for miles in every direction. However, as shown by Figure
1, radiation dosage levels attenuated rapidly outside a 30km radius around the
Fukushima Daiichi and Fukushima Daini nuclear power plants. Furthermore, since
the radiation diffused so rapidly throughout the atmosphere and ocean, however,
the dosage that wildlife around the reactors received decreased quickly within days
after the incident.Radioecologists have focused their research principally on marine
life in waters close to the plant, which could suffer from mutations, stunted growth,
and reproductive defects if they received a sufficiently high dose.In particular,
radioactive isotopes are known to disrupt the normal function of the endocrine
system. Thankfully, the prevalent aquatic species in the nearby ecosystems, namely
mollusks and crustaceans, are remarkably resistant to radiation due to a
combination of their simple physiology and their ion-rich environment, Many fear
eating apex predator fish from Japanese oceans because these fish are known to
naturally bioaccumulate heavy metals, such as tuna's propensity to accumulate
mercury. However, based on the fact that radiation drops 1000-fold just 35
kilometers out from the coast of Japan, radiation geochemists like Florida State
University's William Burnett attest that visible detrimental effects in the entire
populations of apex predator fish are extremely unlikely -- and even less likely to
cause harm to humans. Thus, scientists do not predict observing significant acute
damage at the bottom or top of the food chain.

Lasting Effects
According to Bruno Fievet, marine radioecologist at the French Institute for
Radiological Protectionand Nuclear Safety (IRSN), traces of the Fukushima
Daiichi incident will be measurable in ecosystems surrounding the reactors "for
many years. In particular, Cs-137 worries radioecologists like Fievet because it
has a half-life of approximately 30 years, meaning it will be present at concerning
levels in nearby ecosystems for decades. However, due to a combination of
diffusion and accumulation of certain radioactive isotopes in animal excrement,
the ecological half-life of radiation is in general reported to be much shorter than
the physical half-life.Ultimately, most scientists concur, even the Fukushima
disaster's massive radioactive plume is simply a "drop in the bucket" compared
to the vastness of the atmosphere and Pacific Ocean.That said, many scientists
will continue to closely monitor the health of apex predators and ecosystems
overall in the marine environment in close proximity to the initial nuclear spillage.

Risks from radiation:

Although people in the incident's worst affected areas have a slightly higher risk
of developing certain cancers such as leukemia, solid cancers, thyroid cancer,
and breast cancer, very few cancers would be expected as a result of
accumulated radiation exposures. Estimated effective doses outside Japan are
considered to be below (or far below) the levels regarded as very small by the
international radiological protection community.
In 2013, the World Health Organization reported that area residents who were
evacuated were exposed to so little radiation that radiation-induced health effects
were likely to be below detectable levels. The health risks were calculated by
applying conservative assumptions, including the conservative linear no-
threshold model of radiation exposure, a model that assumes even the smallest
amount of radiation exposure will cause a negative health effect. The report
indicated that for those infants in the most affected areas, lifetime cancer risk
would increase by about 1%. It predicted that populations in the most
contaminated areas faced a 70% higher relative risk of developing thyroid cancer
for females exposed as infants, and a 7% higher relative risk of leukemia in males
exposed as infants and a 6% higher relative risk of breast cancer in females
exposed as infants. One-third of involved emergency workers would have
increased cancer risks. Cancer risks for fetuses were similar to those in 1 year
old infants. The estimated cancer risk to children and adults was lower than it was
to infants.
Conclusion
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant meltdown and ensuing leakage of
radioactive materials was a disaster on the scale of Three Mile Island and
Chernobyl. Because residents living near Fukishima were rapidly evacuated, few
people were directly harmed by the radiation. The health of ecosystems
immediately surrounding the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is
threatened by radioactive isotopes that easily bioaccumulate, such as I-131, as
well as isotopes with long half-lives, such as Cs-137. The natural resilience of
marine ecosystems and the rapid diffusion of radioactive isotopes has led most
scientists to conclude, however, that no adverse health effects will be observed
in animals in these nearby ecosystems. However, further research on abnormal
long-term physiological effects in marine life in the areas immediately surrounding
the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in order to predict environmental
damage from future nuclear disasters, should they occur.