A representation submitted by power and climate policy analyst Shankar Sharma to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and its Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), National Board for Wildlife (NBWL), and Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) has called for the permanent cancellation of the proposed 2,000 MW pumped storage project (PSP) in the Sharavathi Lion-Tailed Macaque (LTM) Sanctuary in Karnataka. The letter, dated December 5, 2025, has also been marked to the Union Environment Minister and the Prime Minister.
The representation states that the minutes of the two public hearings held on September 16 and 18, 2025, related to the project, were not made readily available to the public and had to be obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act after multiple attempts. It criticises what it describes as an “insensitive and reckless” environmental regulatory process and points to delays and absence of annexures to the minutes, which included written submissions and petitions opposing the project. According to the letter, 104 oral submissions were recorded in the hearings, while thousands of written objections and online petitions expressed opposition to the project proposal.
The representation states that there was not a single submission in favour of the project in the hearings, asserting that opposition to the proposal has been widespread across the state. It cites the submission of environmental scientist Dr. M.D. Subhash Chandran of IISc Bengaluru, who referred to a carrying capacity study indicating the presence of up to 77 IUCN Red-Listed plant and vertebrate species in the project area. The letter argues that the project poses severe risks to biodiversity in a tropical rainforest region that forms part of a World Heritage Site.
The objections listed in the document include claims that the project has been proposed in a protected wildlife sanctuary without justification for its location; lack of consideration of alternative solutions; inadequate environmental assessment; failure to account for cumulative ecological impacts in the Western Ghats; and disregard for parliamentary laws, scientific recommendations, and expert opinions, including those from retired forest officials and committee reports such as that of the Gadgil and Kasturirangan panels.
The representation argues that Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) constitute a preferable alternative to PSPs, noting lower capital and storage costs and financial support from the Union government through Viability Gap Funding (VGF) of up to 30% of project cost. It cites comparative studies that show BESS to be economically more viable than pumped storage systems and contends that PSPs do not qualify for similar subsidies. The letter questions why Karnataka should bear higher financial and ecological costs when BESS-based solutions could achieve similar outcomes at a lower burden to electricity consumers.
Sharma has urged MoEF&CC and its associated committees to consider the representation objectively and to stop further processing of the project proposal, stating that continued deliberation would waste public resources given the scale of public opposition. The letter also seeks official acknowledgement of the representation.
Comments