Why the New Draft EIA Is Problematic

Want to become a member of Eat My News? You can enrol for EMN membership now from here.

Assessing Good and Bad

Environmental Impact Assessment or EIA can be characterized as the examination to anticipate the impact of a proposed action/venture on the environment. 

A dynamic apparatus, EIA looks at different choices for a venture and tries to distinguish the option which is the best blend of financial and natural aspects and advantages. 

EIA methodically inspects both gainful and unfavorable outcomes of the task and guarantees that these impacts are considered during venture structure. 

It assists with recognizing possible ecological impacts of the proposed project, proposes measures to relieve unfriendly impacts, and predicts whether there will be any negative natural impacts.

The main purpose of EIA is to assess both the good and the bad possible outcomes of any project in a systematical manner.

EIA in India

The Indian involvement in Environmental Impact Assessment started more than 20 years back. It began in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission solicited the Department from Science and Technology to look at the river valley ventures from an ecological angle.

This was along these lines stretched out to cover those ventures, which required the endorsement of the Public Investment Board. Till 1994, ecological leeway from the Central Government was an authoritative choice and needed legislative help.

On 27 January 1994, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MEF), Government of India, under the Environmental (Protection) Act 1986, declared an EIA warning creation.

Environmental Clearance (EC) was made compulsory for the development or modernization of any action or for setting up new tasks recorded in Schedule 1 of the notice.

From that point forward there have been 12 changes made in the EIA warning of 1994.
The MoEF has, as of late advised new EIA legislation in September 2006.

The notice makes it obligatory for different activities, for example, mining, thermal power plants, river valley, Infrastructure (street, parkway, ports, harbors, and air terminals) and businesses including extremely little electroplating or foundry units to get environmental clearance.

In any case, dissimilar to the EIA Notification of 1994, the new enactment has put the onus of clearing ventures on the state government relying upon the size/limit of the project.

Why the Opposition?

The current draft is being widely criticized for the changes in various rules and regulations, that many believe will pose a grave danger to the environment.

One of the primary drivers of concern is that the draft has excluded just about 40 distinct activities, for example, clay and sand extraction or burrowing wells or establishments of structures, solar and thermal plants, and effluent treatment plants are absolved from earlier EC or earlier EP.

Another such issue is, all B2 ventures, water systems, fertilizers, acids producing, biomedical waste treatment facilities, building development, and zone advancement, raised streets and flyovers, parkways, or freeways are excluded from public consultation.

There are many other issues like this which are being seen as a potential threat to the environment, the government must address these issues and ensure that these rules don’t end up harming nature.

Written by - Chandan Kumar

Edited by - Rudransh Khurana

Post a comment