Indian government rejects Neutrino research site : search for new site on

[Guest guest]

http://www.hindu.com/2009/11/21/stories/2009112154952000.htm

Online edition of India's National Newspaper

Saturday, Nov 21, 2009

*Ministry’s ‘no’ to Neutrino Observatory project in Nilgiris *

 

**

R. Ramachandran

 

*Suggests the project, proposed by Department of Atomic Energy, be moved

to a site near Suruliyar falls *

 

New Delhi: The government has decided against locating a Neutrino

Observatory (INO), an underground experimental physics project, at Singara

in the Nilgiris district of Tamil Nadu. Instead, the Ministry of Environment

and Forests has suggested that the project, proposed by the Department of

Atomic Energy, be moved to a site near the Suruliyar falls in Theni district

of Tamil Nadu.

 

Suruliyar was one of the several sites considered by the scientists, but

rejected as being inferior, compared to Singara.

 

The INO is a major multi-institutional project, at the forefront of

high-energy physics. It aims at addressing several fundamental unresolved

questions in physics by studying elusive particles called neutrinos in a

world class laboratory built underground. A large material overburden above

an underground laboratory helps to stop all other contaminating particles

and allows only the very weakly interacting neutrinos to arrive at the

detector.

 

In a letter to Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Anil Kakodkar

on Friday, Union Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh

said that based on the report of Rajesh Gopal, Additional Principal Chief

Conservator of Forests (PCCF) and Member-Secretary of the National Tiger

Conservation Authority (MS-NTCA), the Ministry cannot give a go-ahead to

Singara.

 

After a discussion with key scientists connected to the project at the

Ministry on September 4, the Minister instructed Dr. Gopal and other forest

officials to visit the project site and submit a report. The visit took

place on October 31. It was followed by a meeting with the scientists at the

PCCF’s office in Chennai on November 3. The Minister too was supposed to

visit the site to ascertain the issues for himself, but it did not happen.

 

“The proposed project site,” says the report, “falls in the buffer zone of

Mudumalai Tiger Reserve and is in close proximity to the core/critical tiger

habitats of Bandipur and Mudumalai Tiger reserves. It is also an elephant

corridor, facilitating elephant movement from the Western Ghats to the

Eastern Ghats and vice-versa.”

 

It must be pointed out that the notification declaring these areas as tiger

reserves was issued only in 2008, six years after the INO project was

proposed and two years after the DAE applied to the Tamil Nadu Forest

Department for approval. According to the scientists, till date no

communication had been received on their application from the Department.

Even more pertinent is the fact that the State government is apparently yet

to endorse the notification.

 

The report says that the area is already disturbed on account of severe

biotic pressure due to human settlements and resorts and that the

construction phase of the project would involve transport of building

materials through the highways passing through the core area of the

Bandipur/Mudmulai Tiger Reserves.

 

It, however, does not say how these resorts came up in the reserved forest

area in the vicinity of the elephant corridor.

 

Interestingly, both the Minister’s letter and Dr. Gopal’s report do

acknowledge the views of R. Sukumar, an expert on the Nilgiris Biosphere

Reserve from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. He was of the view

that the proposed project would not be detrimental to the wildlife and

environment of the region and that the arguments against Singara were, to a

very large extent, exaggerated and misplaced.

 

“Even though various safeguards have been proposed in the environment

management plan and even though I have high regard and respect for Dr.

Sukumar, I am forced to come to the conclusion that Singara location should

not be proceeded with,” says the Minister in apparent contradiction.

 

Asking the DAE to seriously consider the Suruliyar site, the Minister has

said that this site did not pose the types of problems that Singara posed

and environmental and forest clearances should not be a serious issue. The

letter also assures the DAE that the Ministry would facilitate necessary

approvals for the alternative location.

 

A major consideration in favour of Singara over other locations was the

existence of the ‘Charnockite’ geological formation, with an already

excavated cavern of known strength for the underground power plant PUSHEP of

the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), and the associated infrastructure

already established. The INO project was proposed to be located within the

power plant premises.

 

While the new site too has a hydroelectric project and also has Charnockite

formation, a preliminary investigation report by the Geological Survey of

India (GSI) points to the existence of a shear zone at the site where the

tunnel for the experiment could be dug. According to the scientists, a

detailed survey by the GSI would take 4-5 months after which an Environment

Impact Assessment will have to be undertaken.

 

“But Suruliyar too is in a reserved forest area that is dense and would

require cutting down of trees, something that was not required at Singara,”

says Dr. Naba K. Mondal of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, who

is the spokesperson for the project. “Can the government assure us that

forest clearance for this site will be given,” he asks. “Alternatively, we

can move to the nearby Thevaram, which is about 20-30 km away from the

Suruliyar falls. This forest area has only shrubs but there is no source of

water here and water will have to be piped over a distance of 30 km,” he

adds.