HYDROELECTRIC POWER CONTROVERSY

Hydro Electric Power – the raging controversy

What has gone wrong with us?

Keralites are known for their intelligence and hard work. They are recognized as the champions of dedication anywhere outside Kerala. But inside the State, they are ridden by cross-purposes and retrograde activities. We elect governments with vast majorities in the Assembly, but do not allow them to do anything. Any progressive move is quickly stifled by opposition and dialectical differences. We need institutions of higher education, but we will not pay for them. We have no money of our own, but we shall not borrow from those who have it. Private enterprises we look for, but they should not make profit. Unemployment is increasing at a fast pace, but we do everything to prevent factories from working. The rights of labourers are more sacred to us than labour itself.

Hydro Electric Power (HEP) is by far the cheapest and most sustainable source of energy. It is the most eco-friendly form of producing electric power. It will go on as long as there are rains and rivers and the water used is not wasted. It runs on to irrigate uncultivated land, thus increasing our agricultural output.

But a controversy arises every time we plan further Hydro-electric projects. Environmentalists cry out against them, writers and poets and the so called ‘intelligentia’ rise in agitation. Many projects have had to be discontinued half way. We have to take a fresh look at such things and arrive at a consensus, in view of the future generations.

Mostly, I believe, such controversies arise as a result of our setting wrong priorities. It usually happens in Politics where we put individuals before the People. In the modern world of scientific achievements and technological development, there is no doubt that we need a lot of electricity, much much more.

During the days when electricity began to be used, it was primarily meant for lighting up the house. Then slowly it came in handy for running fans, and replacing traditional household gadgets. Nowadays, even the AC is not considered a luxury; leave alone the scores of electrical equipments that come in handy for the housewife. The computer has revolutionized our whole way of life – beginning from the advantages of personal computers, we have passed into a world where electricity is required 24 hours a day, non-stop. The rise in job opportunities provided by BPOs and other computer-related opportunities demand an exponential growth in the supply of electricity. In short, we have become so dependent on this source of power that life is not virtually possible without it. Other sources of energy like thermal, nuclear and solar power are stilted with either high risk factor or low productivity.

I believe that it is the duty of every generation to provide for the future generations. We live on what our predecessors did for us. We should never be the cause for blocking the unending process of human progress. The comforts in our life, the facilities that we enjoy, are the results of what our previous generations did. The electricity that we use now is the gift of some great minds who took the risk of ‘destroying’ a little environment for the sake of greater benefits to humanity. If the creators of Pallivasal and Idukki projects had not taken the risk, what would have been our plight? If some people had not chosen to cut a few trees and construct palaces and houses in ‘Ananthan kadu’, the city now known as Thiruvananthapuram would not have been there. Why, the house that Sugathakumari lives in would not have been there. The electricity that she now uses up in running her house, in making speeches and glaring through the visual media would not have been there, if some ‘thoughtless’ people had not constructed the power generating stations.

It is inhuman to say ‘enough is enough’. We have been gifted by the deeds of our previous generations and we have no right to deny the rights of the coming generations.

We should not behave like ‘the people who have got into the bus’ and deny entry for others.

Progress necessarily means a selective destruction of environment. We cannot achieve anything without sacrificing something. It is one thing to speak of Nature and write poetry on it, but interfering emotionally with the requirements of the future is another thing. Let us not confuse our priorities. Surely, Sugathakumari et al. do not expect our children to live on traditional jobs like pot-making, mat-weaving and hoeing in the fields.

The times when a person could make a living by writing poems and singing ritualistic songs before the serpent god are far gone; not everyone does win the Booker Prize. Those who enjoy all the comforts of life can be philosophic, but it doesn’t provide bread for the future. Those who have enjoyed the benefits of progress have no right to deny it for their children.

The world is growing at such a pace that we need to tap all the available sources of energy. The wrong priorities set in the political arena and the dictates of outdated labour policy have already put our State some 20-25 years behind other southern states. Our potential in the IT field remains unexploited because of our craze for frequent hartals and bandhs. Foreign investors dread to step in because of our uncertain work culture.

Already, electricity is in short supply. It is high time that we did something about it. Unless some firm steps are taken, the State will enter into a dark age. Many projects have been dropped half way and the latest one, Pathrakkadau, is facing stiff objection. Environmentalists have to realize that any progress is possible only by making certain concessions. Here again, we have to set the right priorities. Some forest area and some living area may be inundated, but we have to suffer this necessary evil. The question of endangered species will have to be assessed in the face of the larger benefits to the State and its subjects. Those who have to be evacuated should be rehabilitated properly.

The disturbance caused to the environment will have to be limited to the minimum. We have to admit that much more interference with environment takes place when the cities develop, natural waterways are blocked and large areas of backwaters are filled up as in GCDA. After all, the survival of human beings, their freedom to work and earn a living, their right to live comfortably, and the overall progress of the State where they live in should be placed far above the discomfort to some monkeys and birds which have no present bearing on human life.

Writing poetry and short stories can be a pastime for the affluent, but it does not fetch a living for the great majority. Emotional entanglement with the world of facts only results in confusion and arousal of unwanted sentiments. Nature is no doubt a beautiful subject for poetry and fiction, but attempts to import them into real life to block the progress of humanity and deny the coming generation their job opportunities and necessities of life tantamount to violation of fundamental human rights.

Well, regarding the argument that the engineers and politicians think up such projects and try to implement them for the sake of making money for themselves, speaks volumes about the corruption prevalent in the higher echelons of power. I do not deny such possibilities, but they can indulge in such things in any other field too – not necessarily in the construction of Hydroelectric Power Stations alone. The interference of the environmentalists is in fact a blessing in disguise to them. They can always make money out of incomplete projects and blame the environmentalists for not allowing them to complete it. They can conveniently look for another project, make budget and estimates, get the commission for whatever is done and wait for someone to ask them to stop. I am afraid we spend most of our efforts in this vicious circle – propose new power projects, hinder them, then look for newer ones.

To sum up, it is the need of the day to put the horse before the cart. Let us prioritize our requirements and work towards achieving them, even though we have to make some concessions and sacrifices. If Mahatma Gandhi and his people were worried about losing the lives of some of them, we would not have got freedom. If our researchers had qualms about trying their medicines on a few guinea pigs, many of our medicines would not have been found. If we were sorry about killing animals, the world would have experienced a terrific shortage of food materials. All progress, even human existence, depends on some casualities; let us sacrifice a few woods and birds for the larger benefit of humanity around us, ultimately for the progress of our State.