Greig Aitken, BankTrack
Last month's signing of the contract to build the Rampal
coal plant in Bangladesh, just a few miles from the edge of the world's largest
mangrove forest, has re-triggered concerns both domestically and
internationally about the controversial 1320 megawatt power project.
Late July saw clashes in the streets of Dhakabetween
demonstrators intent on taking their demands to scrap the Rampal project direct
to the office of Bangladesh's prime minister andpolice deploying batons and
tear gas canisters. Local media reported the arrest of six protestors and the
hospitalisation of 16 other participants as a result of the police operation,
which prevented the ‘Save Sundarbans' demonstration from reaching its planned
destination. Eyewitness accounts put the number of injured participants as high
as 50.
Indian groups who also reject the project (see a new video
presenting joint Bangladeshi-Indian civil society resistance to Rampal)
condemned what they described as the use of "brute force" by the
police against a "peaceful protest march", and issued a statement of
solidarity which further called on the Bangladesh government to "stop
using all undemocratic means to deal with legitimate people's protests."
Just two weeks prior, however, the official ‘mood music'
emanating from a Dhaka hotel about the project might as well have come from
another planet. At a ceremony to mark the signing of the engineering,
procurement and construction contract awarded to Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd
(BHEL), India's largest engineering and manufacturing company, Ujjwal Kanti
Bhattacharya, managing director of Bangladesh-India Friendship Power Company
Limited (BIFPCL), the joint venture company undertaking the Rampal
plant,commented to journalists that "We respect the concern of the people
of Bangladesh, we are set to maintain the maximum environmental standards for
the plant".
As tends to be the hallmark of such moments in the laboured
development of controversial fossil fuel projects such as Rampal, the assembled
officials had come to gush. With co-operation between Bangladesh and India
being flagged relentlessly, the principal secretary to Bangladesh Prime
Minister Sheikh Hasina let it be known that Rampal has been ‘a dream project'
of the two countries' leaders, and promised "all sorts of cooperation will
be provided to [BHEL] except time extension." BHEL now has until July 2019
to have the power plant installed and ready for operations.
Scrutiny of the construction contract does indeed suggest
that the Indian giant BHEL is on the receiving end of an awful lot of ‘co-operation'. Yet when viewed alongside
other emerging project details that are now raining down as part of the
official PR monsoon, it's becoming ever more apparent that if Rampal is a
‘dream project' for India, then as currently conceived it stands to become a
nightmare for Bangladesh.
‘Sweeteners'
BHEL won the tender for the $1.49 billion construction
contract at the beginning of this year but the official signing of the deal
dragged on to July due to, as local media sources have pointed out, the company
holding out for "extra sweeteners" from the Bangladesh government
including exemptions from taxes and duties as well as from the mandatory
insurance process. In what could be a worrying precedent for Bangladesh's state
coffers when the involvement of Indian companies is sought for major
infrastructure projects, it's also been reported that it took a personal
intervention from Prime Minister Sheikk Hasina in April to settle the tax
waiver in BHEL's favour.
Meanwhile, in another clear sign that Delhi is running the
Rampal show and putting Indian interests first, negotiations are reportedly
under way between the project promoters and Coal India on the supply of 4
million tonnes of Indian coal per year to fuel the plant.
If this materialises, then it would undermine some of the
baseline calculations - on emissions and pollution - included in the project's
already highly questionableenvironmental impact assessment (EIA), in which
scenarios have been based on coal supplies originating from Australia,
Indonesia or South Africa.
Indian coal is generally reckoned to be of a lower grade
than coal from the other countries referred to in the EIA, but the potential
impacts remain vague since precise details on sulphur and ash content are
unknown. The mounting coal glut in India may, however, have an even bigger
long-term outlet near the Sundarbans - as the controversy over the currently proposed
plant rages, an often overlooked detail in the EIA is the alarming proposal to
build a second 1320 megawatt coal plant adjacent to the first "in the
future".
Some state (of the
art)
Yet, insist Rampal proponents, the coal plant will involve
the world's most efficient and environment-friendly technology. ‘Modern
ultra-Super Thermal Technology' is touted by BIFPCL, but the company's
construction tender document does not require state of the art pollution
control technologies.
For example, the technology required at Rampal will emit
nearly 30% more sulphur dioxide than truly state of the art technology.
Similarly, the outdated technology required at the proposed coal plant can
remove roughly 96% of fine particulate matter, but state of the art technology
can remove 99%. Three percent might not seem like a lot, but when it comes to
extremely toxic, long-lasting and widely dispersing heavy metals such as
mercury emitted over the 60 year life of a coal plant, it matters.
Shockingly too there are no technologies required at Rampal
to specifically eliminate harmful emissions of mercury, nitrogen oxides,
nickel, chromium, arsenic, antimony, cadmium or cobalt, though widely available
technologies exist to do so. Finally, toxic unburned coal particles from the
massive coal piles and transfer points will enter the Passur River and
Sundarbans ecosystem on a daily basis, as the tender documents require only
ineffective water sprays on coal piles, and optional enclosure of stockpiles
and transfer points.
And of the many question marks still hanging over the
project's EIA considerations - including air pollution, direct impacts on water
resources including heavy coal transportation traffic through the network of
sensitive Sundarbans waterways and cumulative ecosystem impacts - poor planning
for the disposal of 0.94 million tons of toxic coal ash per year is just one
aspect of the project design attracting increased expert scepticism and
concern.
The proposed disposal of ash by lagooning and uncontained
‘land development' poses huge environmental risks in an area minimally above
sea level, prone to seasonal flooding, typhoon-driven storm surges, tsunamis,
and subject to - as the EIA does at least acknowledge - large seismic events up
to 7.0 on the Richter scale.
Escalating PR
offensive
While many of the EIA's assumptions have been heavily
criticised, it does at least admit to the possibility of project impacts
arising: "dredging activities," it concedes for example, "may
have impacts on river water quality." Any such precautionary language
about the Rampal project, however, seems to have gone out the window as part of
the promoters' escalating PR offensive.
On July 19, the day after a major splash in the Washington
Post ("A new power plant could devastate the world's largest mangrove
forest") increased international awareness of the long list of problems
that Rampal is stacking up for the Sundarbans and its inhabitants, BIFPCL's
Public Relations Manager Anwarul Azim hit back with a stunning run-through of positive
bullet points about the project, leading him to the flourishing conclusion that
the "Rampal Power Plant will not damage rather it will preserve the
Sunderbans (sic)".
Before getting stuck into his version of project details,
Azim points to energy generation from coal statistics from around the world
(including USA 40%, Germany 41%, China 79%) and contrasts with Bangladesh's
current 2.05% figure. No mention is made of international agreements to curb
emissions, of efforts now materialising in these countries to drastically cut
coal power emissions due to public health and climate crises, or of the rapid
scaling up of renewable energy around the world. Yet Azim writes, "In
order to accelerate the economic development of the country, it is the demand
of time to increase the production of coal-based electricity at the present
moment."
This narrow ‘demand of time' narrative also fails to mention
the rapidly encroaching effects of climate change which Bangladesh, one of the
most vulnerable countries on earth, is staring in the face, nor does it
acknowledge Bangladesh's burgeoning solar power industry, with over 65,000
solar home systems being installed every month, making it the largest and
fastest growing off-grid program in the world.
Nor is Azim detained by perhaps the easiest to grasp time
calculation when it comes to clean versus dirty power generation: solar plants
can be set up in slightly over a year, as opposed to the four to five years
that coal plants take, thereby providing electricity very quickly to people who
desperately need it, as in Bangladesh.
Just one example bullet point from the article illustrates
the kind of glossing of project impacts that is now going on as the project
promoters seek to navigate what could be their final, crucial administrative
hurdle - clearance from Bangladesh's Ministry of Environment and Forest.
"A negligible amount of water (0.05% of the lean period
flow) of [the Passur] River will be used," Azim writes. Yet the project's
EIA acknowledges that water use at the plant will reduce the downstream flow of
the Passur River by 4 million litres an hour, or 35 billion litres each year,
which Bangladeshi NGOs point out is considerable in an ecosystem already
stressed by increasing salinity and reduced freshwater flow from upstream
diversions. The same river, one of the Sundarbans' key waterways, suffered the
latest sinking of a large coal cargo vessel in March this year.
Project finance will
involve reputational risk
Waiting in the wings too is India's Exim Bank, currently
considering a $1.6 billion loan for the Rampal plant construction even if this
will involve taking a ‘reputation risk', as the bank's head recently admitted.
Over 135,000 people and 100 civil society groups have so far petitioned the
head of India's Exim Bank not to finance the Rampal project.
Informed speculation suggests that Exim will only bankroll
the project if agreement on the supply of Indian coal is reached. There are
many reasons why, following global pressure from civil society, none of the
other major international banks - which are still not averse to financing coal
projects especially in the developing world - are prepared to touch Rampal.
Civil society groups in Bangladesh are also taking their
concerns to the international stage. Last month 53 Bangladeshi groups, under
the umbrella group National Committee to Save the Sundarbans, reiterated their
concerns about Rampal to the United Nations's World Heritage Committee and
IUCN. Over 50,000 people from around the world supported their petition.
Reputations, facts and one of the world's most prized
natural assets are at the mercy of Indian coal dreams, and the Bangladesh
government's capitulation is set to unleash a nightmare on its people and
environment. The international community needs to stand with the resistance
movement in Bangladesh and demand that India's Exim Bank abandons its financing
plans for the construction of the reckless Rampal coal plant.
Action: Ask
India's Exim to drop its financing plans for the Rampal construction.
Greig Aitken is a coal campaigner with BankTrack, a
Netherlands-based campaign group tracking the operations and investments of
private sector banks and their effect on people and the planet.