Blog

blog by Shankar Gopalakrishnan

On June 12th, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh made national headlines when he "earnestly appealed" to the Odisha government to avoid force when taking people's land for the POSCO project. He called upon them to respect "dialogue and discussion" and "democratic processes." The Minister's "concern" followed the statements of national Congress leaders condemning the police operation in the area, as the media was filled with images of protesters lying in burning sand, children and women facing off with armed police, and appeals from thousands of people to halt the takeover of 3,000 acres of forest land for POSCO.

But the Minister failed to mention a rather important fact. The law already provides for such a democratic process, and his Ministry is the single biggest reason that those laws are not followed. The result is gross injustice to millions of people across the country, who find that their lands and forests are grabbed for corporate profit (incidentally, let's not call this "development"; in the case of POSCO, for instance, the project will destroy three times as many jobs as it will create and will result in no benefit other than profits to the company).

Let's take a closer look at the process involved. Under section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, "diversion" of forest land, or the use of forest land for "non-forest purposes" (essentially any activity except afforestation) requires the permission of the Environment Ministry. This is the so-called "forest clearance" process. Approximately 23% of the country's land area is recorded as forest; under a 1996 Supreme Court order, all land recorded as forest is subject to the Forest (Conservation) Act. Thus, land use in almost a quarter of the country is technically under the jurisdiction of a single Ministry of the Central government.

These vast areas have millions of people dependent on them for individual cultivation, collection of forest produce and other livelihood activities. In many areas they are also under some form of village management, ranging from the informal forest protection committees in the POSCO area, to the elaborate state-sanctioned Van Panchayats of Uttarakhand, to the entirely community controlled areas of parts of the Northeast.

But unlike most other processes concerned with natural resources - whether it is private land acquisition, the Environmental Impact Assessment process, urban planning, etc. - neither the Forest (Conservation) Act nor its Rules provides for even informing the public, leave alone consulting them, before decisions on diversion of forest land are made. This extreme centralisation of power leads to both absurdity and tragedy. Examples abound: the Lower Subansiri Dam project, where the MoEF has diverted forest land that does not even belong to the government (it is community land); the Polavaram dam, bigger than the Sardar Sarovar project, where more than 250 adivasi villages are to lose their lands and community forests without a word about their rights; and of course POSCO.

Until January 1st, 2008, this was deemed to be legal, despite being grossly unjust. On that date, the Forest Rights Act came into force. The FRA had two critical sets of provisions that affected takeover of forest land. First, it recognised individual and community rights of forest dwellers on forests and forest lands, and explicitly barred (section 4(5)) removal of forest dwellers until the recognition and recording process is complete. Second, and more importantly, the FRA gave communities - and specifically their gram sabhas (assemblies of all village residents) and village institutions - the power to manage and protect forests, biodiversity, water sources and their cultural and natural heritage.

But this clashed headlong with the entire basis of the forest governance regime in the country, under which forests were treated as the private property of the state, to be policed, protected and destroyed as per decisions made by the forest authorities. As a result, despite the fact that it was now engaging in a direct violation of a law, MoEF simply carried on diverting forest land for projects as if the FRA and people's rights did not exist.

Read more>>

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/blog/posco-one-more-case-forest-land-grab

Planting of trees on Environment Day has become a fad…camouflaging the real issue…by many companies...

Too often these are a template/ ticking the box completion exercise rather than delivering any real value or knowledge about the real impending threats to the sustainability….

interesting article.

http://news.discovery.com/earth/biodegradable-trash-garbage-waste-110616.html

THE GIST

• Buying biodegradable products can ease your conscience, but they don't necessarily do much for the Earth.
• Biodegradable products can do more harm than good for the environment if they end up in landfills.
• One of the best ways to reduce your impact on the Earth is to use less and throw less away.

The findings don't necessarily mean that all biodegradables are bad. In many cases, they are in fact greener, especially if they are disposed of correctly. Buying "biodegradable" products is an easy way to reduce guilt about your impact on the Earth.

But when biodegradable trash ends up in landfills, it breaks down more quickly than ordinary garbage does, suggests a new study. The result is a more rapid release of methane, a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.

Some landfills collect methane gas and convert it to energy, but many don't. And in those cases, biodegradables may actually be worse for the environment than ordinary trash -- at least at the end of a product's life -- according to the study.

The findings don't necessarily mean that all biodegradables are bad. In many cases, they are in fact greener, especially if they are disposed of correctly. The point of the study was to simply point out that biodegradables aren't always everything they're cracked up to be.

can anybody tell me about the waste water characteristics of a Solid Waste Processing Unit ? And how it can be dealt with & how can it stop?? 

This set of Words of mine are for Authorities of India & Other Allied organization like NABET as well as people favouring MoEF & NABET for quality.

After a much awaited return of mine on blog of Paryavaran.com, I would like to put some sequence of words as a chain like "food chain" and "food web" of ecology. Mainly i would like to put some chain of legal aspects of Indian Environmental Authority/provision as well as actions taken by them which will be forming a web of Legal Framework & action for Environmental protection.

As i titled, often a question comes in my mind that "For What the legal bodies and provision in India are formed?" are they for environmental protection? And my experienced mind replies: "No they are not for environment protection & improvement" further it sings a line in a very special jingle "They are Eco Friendly".

What comes in your mind? If I am not wrong you are thinking- "this person speaks double things. On one hand he is saying the actions are not for environment protection and on other hand he is saying eco friendly. What rubbish this Naik is speaking?" Am I right?  Well let me clear this. The actions are eco= economic friendly not ecology. If you have noticed the action are resulting in economic benefits of any one either of Proponent or consultant or person enjoying any legal power or a person /organization having established connection with the legal framework. Further, you might also have noticed that the action have not at all proven effective in path of efforts and scheme for Environmental Protection. In my last blog I wrote lot about NABET and from the day many professional said me to put some other words on Blog of Paryavaran. Some of members have also shared that blog for communication via e-mail. I am heartily thankful to them to spread my thought to many professionals of India. In furtherance to that blog I have decided to put some words again. It may be in this Part of blog or might be in some Episodes, as i don't know what time i will have till i finish this blog. Hope this will have good content and you would like and would prefer to share it with other. With due respect to all readers the Word Chain & Word Web on "Legal Actions of Govt.: are they for environment protection? I think these are ECOFRIEDNLY" are here for all interested readers. I apologies if these words hurts any one's feeling/ethical practices/ego/moral etc..These are the things I noticed in last few Years and thought of in last few months.

"Legal Actions of Govt.: are they for environment protection?

In continuation of this question: are they for quality practice in field of Environment?
Here the very first aspects I would like to quote is the Provision of EIA & NABET for EIA consulting organisation. In the very beginning I would like to state that the SO 1533 is designed or framed with minimal required details or guidelines or provision. As noticed & practiced by many proponents & professional ther are lot of gaps in schedule of project category posing mandatory requirement of EIA. If a Proponent plans their project in systematic manner many Activities posing high impacts can be excluded or exempted from Applicability of EIA. One company having activity included in SO 1533, requires Prior EC for its expansion but if it plans it expansion with activities not covered in SO 1533 schd. I as new Project on adjoining site, Prior EC is not applicable in legal terms. Here I would like to quote a example of recent issue I replied.

One existing Thermal power Plant if plans for water intake infrastructure without treatment unit as new project do not require Prior EC except if asked by the River regulatory authority or Irrigation department etc. In Furtherance of this, if one thinks of the impacts on this project what can be concluded? Is it small project having no impacts? Shall exemption from EC be granted to such project? Everyone will say, No it shall be exempted but SO 1533 says as the project is independent one it do not require EC. Even in some cases due to improper provision expansion for such facilities are permitted without EC. So this is the real outcome of provision for environmental protection.
Another example is Manmade fibres, People are doing expansion or announcing Manmade fibre production unit based on CP. CP falls in Petroleum processing unit but authority is granting EC under Manmade fibre category..Further, many of the units are being operated prior to grant of EC as manmade fibre unit with NOC for same hiding CP.

All this gaps & dual way provision are being enjoyed by numbers of unit. I can show huge numbers of industries enjoying such confusing provision almost in all sectors. Many units have shown their expansion as new project below threshold quantity and running as single unit with existing unit without EC as provision permits such tricky project planning. So this is what a big gap and scope of manipulation in SO 1533 is being enjoyed by many industries. So authority must clear this in schedule of SO 1533. Else the SO 1533 is meaningless in many sectors.
To avoid such escape they shall include a provision that “Any activities of sectors covered in SO 1533 shall be subjected to Prior EC and the application of EC shall be done with consideration of Comprehensive/Cumulative Impacts of the project.”

In addition to these contradicting provisions, the way of assessment of Proposal & EIA by Authority and concerned organisation is again questionable?

Two project at same site, rather in same area (<1 Km), are applying for EC. The EIA study for both of the project is almost same. But when the matter of contents comes in to picture of quality, huge deviations in many details can be noticed. Even after that the Authority is granting EC to both projects without noticing such issue of poor quality of one. So question here is: What the authority assesses? What they require/need for EC- EIA or Proper citation of Impacts with necessary Mitigations in EIA report? I think they like only EIA to fulfil their requirement of duty assigned by legislation. They are least concern with the details given in EIA reports. They asks big set of questions but not the actual quality of details written therein. They never check what shall be the true data/details. Even if one will noticed, authority is issuing guideline for QA/QC for monitoring of Water, Emission estimation etc. but their reports even not meeting the criteria published by them. So what such authority can do while assessing content of EIA. If one will check content of EIA regarding Emission for diesel consuming utilities, big issue can be cited in emission. Almost 90% of EIA will fail to prove the correctness of emission from diesel consuming utility. I have noticed this and marked that the emission levels quoted for the diesel is almost 20% in 90% cases. Even after this big issue Authority having so called experts have granted EC to the project submitted EIA with such emission data. Further, in many cases of project in same area, authority is not asking for many thing like clearance from other authority. One project with 100% faulty details gets EC whereas other project with 90% true details will not get EC. I don’t know about such decision of authority. There might be some legal provisions framed by them for their own use.

Now the issue of recent great action of authority-NABET. Authority have posed mandatory requirement of accreditation of NABET for all EIA consultants. This is good if it is being implemented properly with utmost and strict consideration of quality being provided by consultant in EIA. But as it is being operated, the implementation is not at all proper as two experts assesses one’s firm for all sector and coordinators. In many cases a person having >20 Yrs experience and having great knowledge of operations and environmental aspects are rejected based on some fullish question which are not relevant for assessment of coordinator of particular sector. Authority, especially, the top board of NABET accreditation shall prepare a set of question for all sectors and functional area for assessment. Instead they are showing that two person coming for site assessment & appraisal of experts proposed are having knowledge in all sectors and functional area. Is it possible? If so, I would like to say that the NABET team is worlds best team in assessment of environmental quality/firms/expert. But I would like to reflect the truth that the team is the poorest one in world and not at all efficient for such appraisal. The experts coming for site & experts assessment never checks quality in its original form. They never check one’s key knowledge. They never see the actual practice. Here also I would like to quote one example. As mentioned earlier, a project with 1oo% wrong details in EIA have received EC where as almost 80% similar project had faced lot of problems. The shocking matter in this issue is – The consultant who prepared the EIA with 100% faulty details is approved by NABET with huge numbers of Sectors and even those as Category A. By reviewing the EIAs (two-three) as well as a formal but informative discussion with the experts of the firms, I have noticed that the firm has been approved- accredited because it has got very attractive interior of office & labs, it has got numbers of instruments & equipments just to show, it has got numbers of personnel having knowledge of school level or graduate level but possesses PG degree, it has got great connections in govt. offices which created big list of work order showing that the organisation is best etc etc….truely speaking the firm is not at all acceptable for many sectors under scheme of NABET. But the experts of NABET said that the organisation is excellent and that’s why it has got accreditation in Many sectors with Cat-A. On other hand one organisation whoe really did great work in EIA having quality up to 60% (in primary data, impacts assessment, citation of all critical information in EIA, Risk assessment etc.) is rejected even for cat-B.

Besides, recently a solution is shown by the authority that empanel experts from other firms who are approved by NABET to get assured accreditation. No matter where the expert is residing and how much time it will give to your project. For this I would like to say, is it good practice /criteria of accreditation under NABET? How a person in Delhi can contribute in EIA work of a firm based in Mumbai or Ahmadabad or so? Will he travel daily to here n there for EIA works? Will he work for quality? This is worst solution suggested by authority for NABET accreditation. In earlier blog I supported the scheme but after noticing these wrong practices and poor actions, I seriously opposes the scheme. Further, as I mentioned in earlier the scheme and now the process of EC practiced by authority is challengeable legally. Still I wish to wait for some months for such actions. I am preparing rather have prepared with lot of material and action plan against the scheme & authority. If I feel that the scheme and the authority is not going in to the direction for what it is formulated/established, I will surely go for such actions as it is the matter of my ethical practices and the duty of my techno-legal team.

Now at the stage of conclusion of this chain of words, what do feel about the title? Have you noticed the word web making the title appropriate? Don’t you feel the actions together are ECO-FRIENDLY? Do you like to favour these authorities? What shall we do? Shall we go with malfunction to play with legal provision like other & authorities? Shall we keep quiet and walk to see what next by walking along with these people & authorities?

As these questions to yourself, check the correctness of my opinion by studying the cases being granted by authority, check similarly the competence of firms being accredited by NABET and be prepared to save yourself and our environment as well as economy. Soon up on receipt of suggestion & opinion of the readers I will put the next episode in the regards of afore mentioned details.

If you like to reply or suggest please refer my e-mail ID: hnecoerecter@gmail.com.

Thanks for now and with hope to be back again shortly on the blog: Dr. Hemalkumar Naik.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/other-states/article2101043.ece

This article left me with a sunken feeling in the pit of my stomach - just the kind of news that makes the average monday of an environmental professional even more dreary and polluting... 

Granted bad politics has its stink spread everywhere, and the world of environmental protection is not immune to it. However, when the assumed protectors of the environment begin to compromise in the name of progress and development, and prostitute the land for such economic-political profiteering, it is just a colossal loss, a shameful failure for every sentient environmental professional in the country. Minister Ramesh has taken big strides towards clarifying a much needed strong stance against climate change; wonder why he should succumb to the futility of such aspirations. Environmental protection and "growth for growth's sake" are diametrically opposite; let us not allow compromises of this principle to fester the wound that the land, air and waters of India already hurt with.. 

Vinodh Valluri

As mentioned earlier,on the basis of 120 samples  from a power loom environment and 120 samples from an office setting, I was able to build up workforce profiles.

For the past few years global researchers on noise have been postulating about its non-auditory health effects.By way of  a schedule administered to study samples for two years, I tested some of the postulations,with surprising results.

Needless to say, shedule was administered personally by me.A considerable amount of time for this was intentionally allotted & set aside while constructing the study protocol. The subjects were assured about the confidentiality of their responses and were told that the study was an overall health profile study. Extra care was taken to ensure that noise, as an occupational hazard was not stressed upon in any way, nor was it avoided if the subjects initiated discussion about it. In case of a discussion, the researcher gave objective and relevant information relating to the specific query.

1. “Long-term exposures to noise-stress may influence health directly through neuroendocrine mechanisms or indirectly through their association with unhealthy behavior” state Plant et al. (1992), Miller (1999) and Sinha (2001).        

Elaborating further they state, workers affected by workplace stress are at risk for excessive use of alcohol and other substances in varying degrees. This will then act separately to cause health effects in addition to those related to noise exposure.

The present study supported conclusions drawn by the studies quoted above because subjects from the high-noise exposed group when compared to subjects from the low-noise exposed control group demonstrated a higher prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, cigarettes and tea use.

Alcohol had a prevalence of 57% in the experimental high-noise exposed group while in the low-noise control group alcohol had a prevalence of 36 %. Similarly, tobacco was used by 48% subjects of the experimental group as compared to 19% in the control group.              

Dear Members,

Let me share with you a little secret on this "World Environment Day". http://www.Paryavaran.com has arrived! With more than 2000+ top environment professionals from all over the world as our members, from 1000+ environment organizations, our network is one of the most vibrant association of environment thought leaders and dreamers who are destined to make this world a better place to live. 

http://www.Paryavaran.com  is about eco-systems. A web of relationship between individuals and organizations that  developed due to their common goal towards a sustainable society.

It is also about dreams. Dreams in the eyes of   young and not so young environment professionals, nature lovers  and organization who strive to find satisfaction in the service of mother earth. We cannot let that dream die soon.

I cannot do it alone. I need each and every one of you today to convince their organizations to join us as a Institutional Member and help support us to lead the "chakra" of change. They can join us today at http://www.paryavaran.com/page/paryavarancom-institutional .

I also took this occasion to inaugurate a "Environment Mentors Club" where our members can stop and share their story of their "Paryavaran Yatra"  . It is a place to inspire and get inspired. Check it out at http://www.paryavaran.com/group/paryavaranmentorsclub and join it today. Here is a bonus.

"Indian Environment Network" is proud to present to you Mamta Tomar, Asst. Managing Director of ELM TRADING & CONTRACTING COMPANY and M/S. JM ENVIRO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. (http://www.jmenviro.com ) who has partnered with us in the pioneering task of mentoring the future generation of professional environment ecopreneurs. She readily agreed to share her life story with our members, specially young girls and students joining the environment profession who would like to reach to the skies... Come let us hear her story and get inspired.... . Link :http://bit.ly/kVnx8Q 

Take some time out from your busy schedule to thank here for her painstaking effort to share with us her "life story" in the environment sector. Remember, you are next in line. If you want to share your story too, email me at ckdenv@envindia.com or just ping me through me profile page http://www.paryavaran.com/profile/envindia .

Again, wishing you a very happy "World Environment Day" .

Chandra Kishore

Founder

Indian Environment Network.

Dear All,

International Seminar on Waste management will be held on 7 June @ Sathyabama University Chennai,

pls circulate among your friends

pls refer the link for more reference .

20110530160241_waste_mgt_2.pdf

Regards

Rajesh Kumar .N

nature _ rajesh @yahoo.com

ME .Envrio-Engineering (Part-time)

Ist Year Student

Love the nature as you love yourself

The Society of Earth Scientists (SES) is organizing a National Conference on “Science of Climate change and Earth’s Sustainability: Issues and Challenges” on scientists-people partnership  at Lucknow from 12-14 Sept., 2011. The circular of the conference is attached for your information. We are expecting a good gathering of eminent scientists and leaders of different domains working on climate change for interaction.

The abstract submission date is extended to 15^th June’11.

Dr. Satish C. Tripathi/Dr. Venkatesh Dutta
Honorary Editor,Earth Science India and Secretary, The Society of Earth Scientists
E-mail: sctgsilko@rediffmail.com, earthscienceindia@gmail.com 
Website: www.earthscienceindia.info 
Office: C-207, Indira Nagar, Lucknow-226016, (U.P.), India 
Phone: 0522-2350138; 07607374176

Book title: Noise Control handbook

Editor: Cyril Harris,  McGraw Hill Publishers

Chapters worth reading are on:  Community noise: Noise survey;  Community response to noise;  Physiological effects;  Human Performance & Noise.

Yet another good reference is my student's Ph.D. thesis the effect of noise on home environment (Namita Bhatnagar: submitted to Nagpur University). Two papers out of this thesis have bagged best paper awards too.

Dear all,

I would like to know about the procedure for Export of Hazardous Waste. What are the rules and regulations and what needs to be done to export it.

Every one of us asking the Government to make some rules, regulation and law to takle the problem of E-waste. This is a wrong approach. We should ask the Government to create facility for collecting the E-Waste. Facilities should come first and education of the people to make use of the facility and why e-waste should be recycled (benifts and income from e-waste and harm it can do if we dont recycle) only when people dont make use of the facility, the rules, regulations and laws should come to decipline the people. Governments in India are notorious of making rules and people in government and politicians make use of such law to harase the people and make money (Bribe). Courts and Lawyers join in to dicide what punishment should be given to people who are honest and dont want to bribe and get away from punishment. I think environmentalists job is to educate the people and force the Government to create facilities needed and not help make rules, regulations and laws to punish our citizens. Lets not waste time on rules, regulations and laws, but spend time on educting the people and forcing the government to create facility for collection, recycle and recover materials from E-waste. It is a profitable business to recycle (recover whatever material from it for reuse) e-waste. Electronic Industry pays tax and duties, buyers pay taxes and duties on purchase. Employees working in electronic industry pay income tax. What for these taxes are collected? Is it for buying new cars and furnishing and remodeling and foreign tous of Ministers? This attitude should stop? It is time that educated think of forcing the government for creating facilities first and then educating the people on how, why and benifits of using such facilities, then make rules if people dont use the facilities created.

We pay huge tax on Cars, pay road tax, Pay insurance premium, Pay huge tax (+40%) on Petrol/Disel and then pay Tols on Roads, Pay panalty or bribe when you voilet road laws because of congestion in Road (resulting from non availability of good roads and wide roads), create accidents because of non availability of good and wide roads, die as a result and make our families suffer. We then blame ourselves that we voilated the rules? What are we doing about the Governent, Police, Courts, Politicians?