Sharavathi Hydroelectric Project: The cost of energy transition

TThe Karnataka High Court earlier this month directed the State government to halt work in the forest area for the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project until further orders. A group of environmentalists had moved the Court by challenging the State Wildlife Board’s approval for the proposed project in the Sharavathi Lion-Tailed Macaque Wildlife Sanctuary, a part of the Western Ghats and a biodiversity hotspot. The court’s decision boosted the morale of environmentalists who have opposed the project since it was proposed in 2017.

Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) has proposed the project in the Sharavathi river valley, which flows for about 130 km across the Western Ghats before reaching the Arabian sea. The river is currently the state’s main source of hydroelectric power and there are four major power plants operating in its valley.

KPCL aims to generate 2,000 MW through this project to meet peak hour energy demands that can reach 18,000 MW per day. The project was defended on the grounds that the Central Electricity Corporation has proposed a transition to clean energy, targeting 50% non-fossil fuel capacity by 2030. The cost of the project, which was estimated to be around ₹4,800 crore in 2017, has increased to approximately ₹10,240 crore.

Moreover, although the project has received approval from the State Wildlife Board and in-principle approval from the National Board of Wildlife (NBWL), forest and environmental clearances are still pending.

environmental concerns

The Karnataka State Wildlife Board approved the project in January 2025 with certain conditions. Initially, KPCL had estimated that more than 16,000 trees would be felled for the project. The board recommended reducing that number to 7,000 to 8,000 trees.

Still, the project continued to face stiff opposition from different groups. Environmentalists, local people, farmers’ organizations and heads of religious institutions spread across Shivamogga and Uttara Kannada districts are protesting against the project. They held several meetings and highlighted the damage the project would cause to forests and endangered plant and animal species, including lion-tailed macaques endemic to the region. Residents of the region, who have been exposed to frequent landslides due to heavy rains in the last few years, are worried that the tunnel construction will cause irreparable damage to the region. They are also concerned that the implementing agency may acquire additional forest land to lay the lines needed to carry the electricity generated by the project. The petitioners, including environmentalist Akhilesh Chipli, alleged that the project was against laws banning non-forest activities in the area.

Interestingly, the project proposal was not recommended in the site inspection report submitted by Praneetha Paul, Deputy Inspector General of Forests, Regional Office of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF). The officer stated that the construction of new roads, expansion of existing roads and other structures will lead to the complete destruction of wet evergreen forests, while cutting down trees will isolate the lion-tailed macaque population. Environmentalists cited this report as an important document to support their arguments.

Considering the serious public opposition, KPCL representatives held meetings in Shivamogga and parts of Uttara Kannada in October 2025 to defend the project. A team official tried to convince people that the impact of the project would be minimal. They also argued that the project was necessary given the need to reduce dependence on fossil fuels in energy production.

permanent struggle

However, KPCL’s efforts failed to convince the protesters. Given the stiff opposition, MoEF sent a panel of experts to visit the project site, which said in its report that “the limited operational benefit offered by the project appears to outweigh the irreversible ecological, environmental and social costs.”

The legal setback and the negative expert report posed a significant obstacle for the project’s proponents. KPCL’s next move before the Court and NBWL will be watched closely.