Citizen Position Paper on Pumped Storage Projects in the Western Ghats

Nirmala Gowda

Nirmala Gowda

Motivated by a shared commitment to protect the Western Ghats—especially its legally protected and eco-geologically sensitive areas—a coalition of researchers, lawyers, activists, local communities, and civil society organizations from across South India gathered in Shimoga for a two-day knowledge summit focused on Pumped Storage Projects (PSPs) in the region. The deliberations during and following the summit culminated in a Citizen Position Paper on Pumped Storage Projects in the Western Ghats.

As part of the summit, we undertook an in-depth examination of four specific PSPs: Sharavathi, Varahi, and Saundatti in Karnataka, and Tarali in Maharashtra.

Discussions were grounded in the realities of these projects, covering themes such as: Ground reports on cumulative environmental and social impacts including the carrying capacity of the rivers, environmental governance and legal frameworks, cost–benefit analysis, India’s energy scenario, the projected extent and role of PSPs in the broader national context, and viable options for electricity storage and their trade-offs.

The deliberations during and following the summit resulted in the following joint statement, which articulates the collective citizen position

While we strongly support India’s renewable energy transition, we recognize that not all projects promoted under the banner of “renewables” are inherently sustainable or ecologically benign. The details matter — and above all, location matters.

The cases of the Sharavathi and Varahi Pumped Storage Projects exemplify the critical importance of location. First, their siting within Wildlife Sanctuaries is a direct violation of Section 29 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, as such projects are not in the best interest of wildlife. Second, both projects are located in landslide-prone, dense-canopied evergreen forests of the Central Western Ghats—among India’s most vital carbon sinks—within legally notified sanctuaries that harbour exceptional endemism and some of the last remaining Lion-tailed Macaques in the world. To borrow the words of Deputy Inspector General of Forests Praneeta Paul from her detailed site inspection report: “disproportionate ecological fallout” — that phrase captures it all.

Furthermore, the landslides in Malin (2014, Maharashtra), Kodagu (2018, Karnataka), and Wayanad (2024, Kerala) should have already served as unmistakable warning bells for the government. Yet dam-building, large-scale drilling, tunnelling, and other heavy construction continue in some of the most geologically unstable terrains. Such interventions pose grave risks to human safety, wildlife, forest ecosystems, and the integrity of public infrastructure.

This is not a question of if a disaster will occur, but when. And when it does, it will not be an ‘Act of God’—it will be an ‘Act of Government’: the wholly foreseeable consequence of forcing infrastructure into unstable and legally protected landscapes, in open defiance of scientific evidence and the precautionary principle. The recent catastrophes in the fragile Himalayas—including the devastating mudslide in Dharali, the cloudburst-triggered flash floods in Kishtwar, and the avalanche in Chamoli—should now compel an urgent course correction.

We have collectively submitted to the MoEF&CC a 27-page letter raising our objections regarding the Sharavathi PSP project to the Forest Advisory Committee ahead of its meeting on 30 July 2025. The letter sets out eight clear grounds of objection and presents well-defined alternatives.

With over 4.7 times the required pumped storage capacity at the country level already in the environmental clearance pipeline, the Sharavathi and Varahi projects are clearly redundant. While pumped storage plants (PSPs) can play a role in storing renewable energy, particularly solar, the critical question remains: how many do we actually need? Projections must be realistic, not inflated.

Moreover, viable alternatives such as Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), large-scale energy efficiency measures, and a range of demand-side management strategies—already outlined in the National Electricity Plan (2023–27)—must be thoroughly evaluated before committing the country to pumped storage projects in sensitive and vulnerable locations of over-engineered river valleys, where the ecological damage would be irreversible and disproportionate. Battery technologies are evolving rapidly, becoming increasingly cost-effective and modular, with the advantage of being sited much closer to demand centres. While BESS carries environmental concerns, particularly around recycling and e-waste management in India, PSPs entail large-scale forest loss and biodiversity destruction. The choice before us must be judicious, not binary.

This Citizen Position Paper represents the collective voice of researchers, lawyers, activists, local communities, and civil society organizations across the Western Ghats. It sets out clear objections, evidence-based alternatives, and a charter of demands to guide policy and decision-making on Pumped Storage Projects in fragile and legally protected landscapes

Our Collective Demands

1. PSPs must NOT be located within legally protected areas or in ecologically, geologically, and otherwise sensitive zones of the Western Ghats.

2. River valleys that are already over-engineered beyond their carrying capacity and heavily burdened by competing demands for water must be avoided. The few remaining free-flowing rivers are rare ecological assets and must be safeguarded.

3. The general importance of energy storage cannot serve as a blanket justification for approving every PSP. Each proposal, whether on-river or off-river, must undergo rigorous evaluation of its site-specific and basin-wide cumulative impacts, with full consideration of ecological costs and thorough assessment of viable alternatives.

4. A comprehensive environmental and social impact assessment—conducted by an independent agency—must cover all project components (including transmission lines, access roads, communication infrastructure and bridges) and account for the compounded and cascading impacts of existing hydropower and other water diversion infrastructure in the basin.

5. The Wildlife (Protection) Act, the Forest (Conservation) Act, the Environment (Protection) Act, and the EIA Notification, 2006 must be upheld in both letter and spirit.

6. A rigorous, transparent, and diligent assessment of credible alternatives to PSPs—such as Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), large-scale efficiency measures, and demand-side management—must be the first priority before approving new capacity. This includes improving energy conveyance and use efficiency, and incentivizing behavioural changes, so that the need for additional generation (including peaking power) is minimized.

7. Affected local communities must be engaged through transparent and participatory processes, ensuring their informed consent is obtained before any approvals.

8. All project-related documents, especially the Detailed Project Report (DPR), must be placed in the public domain in accessible formats and languages.

9. Electricity for pumping must be sourced exclusively from renewable energy. Any reliance on coal-based electricity would render the project fundamentally non-renewable.

10. The electricity generated must be distributed equitably, prioritizing local and regional needs rather than distant demand centres alone.

11. Robust oversight mechanisms must be created to safeguard the integrity of environmental governance. Corruption, lobbying, and undue political or corporate influence must be actively identified and prevented.

In Conclusion, PSPs must be developed with due consideration to ecological limits. We cannot solve the energy crisis by triggering a water crisis or a collapse in biodiversity. The blind pursuit of energy targets that destroy ecosystems is not progress—it is borrowing from a future we cannot repay.

The earth, the air, the land and the water are not an inheritance from our fore fathers but on loan from our children. So, we have to handover to them at least as it was handed over to us – Mahatma Gandhi.