| November 30, 2008 | Sunday | Zilhaj 1, 1429 |
|
In self-destruct mode?
SINCE Wednesday night I have been as distressed as many others must have been on seeing the damage done to the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel on Bombay’s Apollo Bunder.
This impressive domed building was constructed by that great man of India, Jamsetjee Tata, in 1902-03 and has been home to many families for over a century.
The destruction, the work of bigots who are now known as militants or terrorists, is being linked with us, with Pakistan, this desolate wonky land now governed by people of little credibility. But more about this another day — now on to a pressing matter at home.
Pakistan’s energy per capita consumption is low — 14 Million British Thermal Units (MBTU) as compared to 344 MBTU in the US and 162 MBTU in the UK — an indicator that Pakistan is a backward country. Even more alarming is the fact that we use this energy wastefully and do not convert it into useful output. Our efficiency of energy use is one-third of that of the US and one-fifth of that of the UK. This should not be so. And while tackling this energy deficit the government must first tackle the energy waste and inefficiency.
In May 2007 I wrote about the potential hazards of a floating liquefied natural gas (LNG) re-gasification terminal being set up by Excelerate Energy of Texas, US (now replaced by a mystery sponsor) for Pakistan Gasport Limited, a local company whose principal sponsor is the Associated Group, the largest single producer of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG/propane) in Pakistan. As per law, the details were made known in an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report to be discussed at a public hearing recently organised by the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa).
The LNG terminal is to be located in the sea, about four kilometers south of the Korangi Fish Harbour, just off the main Phitti Creek shipping access channel to Port Qasim. Together with gasifying LNG for injection into the SSGC trunk pipelines LPG will also be extracted and stored in tanks near the shore adjacent to the Fish Harbour. Both sites are based on the reclamation of over 60 to 75 acres of seabed and mangroves. The 25-acre LPG storage site is near the beach and will adversely affect the livelihood of the fishermen who operate from numerous adjacent goths, including Chasma, Ali Brohi and Kasheli.
This is in violation of the centuries-old common-law Public Trust Doctrine which does not permit the privatisation and commercialisation of sea fronts: all citizens must have unfettered access to the shore for recreation and amenities. The Public Trust Doctrine has been upheld by the Sindh High Court in the Nestle/Education City case (2005 CLC 424) and in the Usmani Park/ DHA beach case (2007 CLC 1358, 2007 SBLR 899).
Concerned citizens have also asked whether or not a detailed hydraulic study has been carried out to establish the adverse effects of such land reclamation (and related dredging) on the hydraulic regime of Port Qasim, Korangi Fish Harbour and related marine facilities.
They have also questioned the basis on which the site has been selected. It is presently sited at 20 km from the Quaid’s mazar, 12 km from Jinnah Airport, 18 km from DHA Phase-5, and some four to 10 km from the congested residential areas of Korangi. Would it not have been preferable, albeit at a higher cost, to locate the floating terminal out at sea, with pipelines on the seabed connecting to the SSGC network? LNG terminals are vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquakes, storms, tsunamis and to sabotage/terrorist action. Major spills or leaks could endanger the lives and health of millions of people, through burns, explosions, freezing and asphyxiation within a radius depending on the wind.
Some weeks ago, Sepa held an EIA public hearing for two allied projects at Sonda-Jherruck in Thatta district, some 160 km from Karachi: a coal (dirty/poor quality) mine with a production of 1.8 million tons per annum, and a 405 MW mine-mouth steam power plant to be established by a Chinese firm, Global Energy Development (Pvt) Ltd, a subsidiary of China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation (CMC).
Coal is a dirty fuel and is used extensively in China with terrible environmental consequences. For example, Linfen, in the heart of China’s coal/industrial belt, is one of the most polluted places on earth. The World Bank situates 16 out of 20 of the world’s worst polluted cities in China. Worldwide, the extraction and combustion of coal has severe health and environmental impacts. In the United States, 47 workers were killed in coal mine accidents in 2006, while China’s State Work Safety Supervision Administration reported a staggering 4,746 deaths. Pollution emitted by coal-burning power plants and factories affects the health of millions of people. A recent World Bank study identified coal combustion as China’s largest source of outdoor air pollution, to which it attributed 350,000 to 400,000 premature annual deaths.
Inadequate details were provided in the EIA reports, with the proponents promising to do whatever was necessary to mitigate any adverse affects of the mining (rehabilitation of land, acid mine drainage, control of dust and noise pollution, etc) or the power plant (control of oxides of sulphur SOx and nitrogen NOx, reduction of greenhouse gases CO2 and methane, decrease in fly-ash and particulates, etc). Also presented were features of a previous showcase project undertaken in Bangladesh, at Barapukuria.
Last month, the Anti-Corruption Commission of Bangladesh submitted a charge sheet against former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, 10 former ministers, and five others, in the Barapukuria Coal Mine graft case, stating that the accused caused a loss of millions of takas to the public exchequer by illegally awarding the contract to CMC, a blatant abuse of power. In a connected story, the Bangladesh press reported: “Due to massive project cost escalation and low coal production, Barapukuria coal mine has incurred a loss of Taka1280m since it started production two years back, according to a Petrobangla source. The mine will continue to incur losses for around six years even if it maintains a healthy coal production rate and the government maintains a coal sales rate of US$70 per tonne.”
While there is no doubt that Pakistan needs energy, and we should exploit our local resources, can we not do it in a clean manner — both in the technology utilised and the contractors employed? My engineer can substantiate what has been written above. Will the knowledgeable please help!
arfc@cyber.net.pk
