Alarm over misinterpretation of forest carbon study amidst unabated power project-driven deforestation
In the wake of a recent media report suggesting that India's forests are losing their ability to absorb carbon dioxide, ecological experts and environmental activists are voicing deep concern over what they describe as a dangerous misreading of scientific data that could embolden continued ecological degradation in the name of development.
The report, based on a study by researchers at IIT Kharagpur, claims that “rising greenness in forests isn’t translating into greater carbon uptake,” and attributes the decline in photosynthetic efficiency to increased soil dryness and heat stress. But for long-time power and climate policy analyst Shankar Sharma, the implications of this study, and especially the media portrayal of it, could severely undermine public understanding of the ecological value of forests, particularly India’s natural forests.
“This is a deeply troubling development,” Sharma wrote in a detailed letter to Dr. T.V. Ramachandra, Professor at the Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru. Sharma urged the IISc team to step in and provide scientific clarification on the matter. He fears that the report, whether intentionally or through oversight, fails to distinguish between commercial plantations and ecologically rich natural forests—potentially playing into the hands of vested interests looking for justification to divert forest lands for non-forestry uses.
While acknowledging that he has not yet read the original IIT Kharagpur report, Sharma raised alarms about how easily the headlines and summary findings can be misconstrued by policymakers, forest departments, and industry lobbyists. “It may provide them another reason to start denigrating the very role of forests in a narrow perspective, and lead to further decimation of our forest wealth,” Sharma warned, pointing to already alarming trends in forest diversion.
Indeed, India has seen a rapid diversion of forest land in recent years. Citing media reports, Sharma noted that over 173,000 hectares of forest land were approved for non-forestry use in recent years, with nearly 60,000 hectares diverted in just three years. Further data indicate that primary forest loss between 2014 and 2019 exceeded 120,000 hectares—36% more than the previous five-year period. Even more disturbingly, over 500 projects in protected areas and eco-sensitive zones received clearance from the National Board for Wildlife between June 2014 and May 2018 alone.
“These are not just numbers,” Sharma said, “they represent irreversible ecological damage and a continued assault on the life-support systems for millions of Indians.” He underscored that natural forests serve multiple ecosystem functions—from carbon sequestration and oxygen production to rainfall regulation, groundwater recharge, biodiversity conservation, and even micro-climate stabilization.
He expressed particular concern over the widespread implementation of linear infrastructure projects—power lines, highways, railways, and canals—cutting across ecologically fragile zones, especially in the Western Ghats and the Himalayas. “In Karnataka alone, more than 20 such projects in the Western Ghats are reportedly under various stages of planning or implementation,” Sharma noted.
He pointed to the infamous Mysore-Kozhikode 400 kV double-circuit power line built over a decade ago, which resulted in the felling of over 50,000 trees in Kodagu district, severely disrupting the wildlife habitat in and around a sanctuary. The rationale for that project, he argued, was flawed even at the time, as Kerala had failed to adequately promote rooftop solar and other decentralized renewable options.
“This is not just history repeating—it’s a systematic failure,” Sharma emphasized. “The recent solar surge in Kerala, which the state electricity board claims may impose a ₹500 crore annual liability due to grid instability, only reinforces the argument that power needs can be met through decentralized systems without ravaging forests.”
In another case, he called attention to the proposed 400 kV Tamnar-Goa transmission line, which would slice through the Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary and decimate approximately 177 hectares of dense tropical rainforest in the Western Ghats—primarily to carry coal-based electricity from Chhattisgarh to Goa, with no clear benefit to Karnataka, which would bear the brunt of the ecological fallout.
The broader issue, Sharma stressed, is the policy failure to prioritize distributed renewable energy systems, demand-side management, energy efficiency, and smart grids. He called on the IISc team to explore these alternatives through credible studies and provide scientific direction on how India can meet its energy needs without causing irreversible ecological damage.
Sharma referred to the comprehensive international study led by Professor Mark Z. Jacobson of Stanford University titled "Impacts of Green New Deal Energy Plans on Grid Stability, Costs, Jobs, Health, and Climate in 143 Countries", as a potential model for India. He urged IISc to conduct a similar nation-specific study, given its engineering and ecological expertise.
He reserved sharp criticism for institutional policy bodies like the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) and NITI Aayog, accusing them of “failing in their mandates” to undertake long-term planning based on rational energy-environmental trade-offs. “There is no diligently prepared national energy policy guiding these decisions,” Sharma said, “yet the authorities continue approving conventional power projects, massive renewable energy parks, pumped storage systems, and associated infrastructure without assessing cumulative ecological impacts.”
One of the most recent cases that exemplifies this trend, Sharma argued, is the National Board for Wildlife’s ‘in-principle’ approval for a pumped storage project in the Sharavathi Valley Lion-Tailed Macaque Sanctuary—an area of immense biodiversity significance. “It’s a classic example of institutional irresponsibility,” he said.
In his appeal, Sharma expressed confidence in the capacity of IISc’s Energy & Wetlands Research Group to take up such a nationwide assessment and advocate for a rational, ecologically sound energy policy. “Such a report can become a good model for the entire country,” he concluded. “I cannot think of a better approach to persuade our policymakers and authorities to adopt a sustainable energy-environment pathway than through your team’s recommendations.”
With the stakes rising on multiple fronts—climate, biodiversity, and community livelihoods—Sharma’s intervention underscores the urgent need for scientific clarity and policy accountability, lest misguided interpretations continue to justify the unrelenting erosion of India’s irreplaceable forest wealth.
Comments