• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth
#1
Can we sort the facts from the myths on this "Sethusamudram Project" and the opposition to it?

Consider the following article:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->March 18, 2007
Stop Setu Project, save South India

Setusamudram Project and impending tsunami devastation


Ramar bridge (Ram Setu) had saved the coastline during tsunami 2004; so stop Setu Project. Breaking the bridge with a 300-meter wide canal will suck the next, impending, tsunami directly into the Indian coastline. Devastation will be incalculable, particularly in southern India. Government of India should stop further work on Setusamudram Project and stop meddling with the natural protective structure of Ram Setu.

By Dr. S. Kalyanaraman

The Ramar bridge (at a high elevation) from the rest of the shoal accumulations acted as a natural barrier preventing the direct devastation of the entire Indian coastline south and southwest of Nagapattinam.

Setusamudram Project has been put on fast track, with little concern for detailed impact analyses on lives of coastal people and the imperative of continuous dredging operations to operate the channel.

The most devastating comment on the project comes from Dr. Tad S. Murthy: "I like this (Setusamudram) project but there is a flaw. The entrance to the channel should be re-oriented towards the eastern side. Otherwise, there is a chance that it may create a deepwater route for another devastating tsunami. This may cause huge destruction in Kerala." Let me explain why the warning should be taken seriously.

During the last tsunami, the Ramar bridge (at a high elevation) from the rest of the shoal accumulations acted as a natural barrier preventing the direct devastation of the entire Indian coastline south and southwest of Nagapattinam.

This shows the spread of the massive displacement of waters displaced by the plate tectonic event at Aceh. The spread was dosing the southern Tamil Nadu coastline, circled the entire Sri Lanka island and moved partially into Kerala and towards the Ramar bridge. This circling around Sri Lanka occurred because the Ramar bridge acted as a natural shoal barrier preventing the inflow of waters.

If a Setusamudram channel is dug through the bridge, it will act as a channel for the waters to flow directly into the entire southern Indian coastline beyond Dhanush-kodi and into the coastline of Kerala right into the Konkan region. The devastation will be incalculable.

This clearly shows how Ramar bridge (Ram Setu) had acted as 'a high wall' and, in fact, saved most of the coastline west and northwest of Dhanushkodi from devastation.

There are clear indications that the environmental clearance was done without taking into account fundamental engineering and cost-benefit factors:
1.      Effect of a tsunami-type of event on the project (all scientists are unanimous that a recurrence of tsunamis cannot be ruled out).
2.      Locations for dumping the dredged sand
3.      Costs of continuous dredging given the continuous sea currents, which tend to create the shoals and again rebuild the Ramar bridge making the project inoperable for most of the time.
4.      The types of naval craft which can navigate through the project channel (apparently, the heavy oil tankers cannot go through this channel and will continue to circumnavigate around Sri Lanka and through Straits of Malacca to reach the markets of South- East and East Asia. There has been no market study of the numbers and types of vessels that will navigate through the channel and the freight rates expected to be paid by these vessels for being tugged through the channel.

In the interests of safety of the lives of the coastal people, it is prudent to stop the project work until the fundamental factors are re-studied and re-evaluated. It is also essential to involve NIOT and create a Marine Archaeological Unit to study the archaeology of the Ramar bridge and Kizhakkarai (Tiruchendur) where a s'ankha industry flourishes. It will be a tragedy of incalculable proportion to the cultural traditions of India, if this industry were to be devastated by the project.

It will be prudent to study the impact of the project on the cultural aspirations of the people and industries such as the ones that support livelihood of s'ankha divers. Impact on fisheries and future projects for desalination of seawater to provide drinking water to coastal towns should also be evaluated. The possibility of choosing an alternative route for the channel with little impact on the Ramar bridge should also be re-studied, taking into account the satellite image analyses which show that the secular historical trend of incursions and recessions of seawaters from almost the entire Indian coastline from Dwaraka through Gulf of Khambat, through Gulf of Mannar up to Ganga Sagar (West Bengal) are caused by a number of factors not excluding plate tectonics and global warming cycles.

The received narratives of the submergence of Kumarikandam should be a pointer to the imperative of careful studies before embarking on projects which hurt the cultural sentiments of the people who are inheritors of a glorious sea-faring, maritime, riverine civilization continuum.

(The writer is heading Sarasvati Research Centre and he is a former Sr. Exec., Asian Development Bank. He can be contacted at kalyan97@yahoo.com)
http://tinyurl.com/2fj7rz <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Messages In This Thread
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by narayanan - 03-10-2007, 07:55 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-10-2007, 09:02 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 01:00 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 01:43 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 02:31 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 07:31 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 08:59 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 10:02 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 01:25 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 03:27 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 04:19 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-11-2007, 10:13 PM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-12-2007, 01:24 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-12-2007, 06:11 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-12-2007, 06:25 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-12-2007, 08:30 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-12-2007, 10:22 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-13-2007, 04:09 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-13-2007, 05:15 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-13-2007, 05:55 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-13-2007, 09:04 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-13-2007, 10:37 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-15-2007, 12:34 AM
Sethusamudram Project Facts Vs. Myth - by Guest - 03-22-2007, 07:59 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)