“When ash filled trucks pass through this road, the terraces get covered in a ‘1-inch’ layer of ash. We clean our homes in the morning, but by evening, the floors also get covered,” Virender Prasad said in his living room. He is a resident of Bazar Tand, a village less than 1 Km away from the ash pond of Bokaro Thermal Power Station (BTPS).
BTPS made headlines in September 2019 when its ash pond breached, flooding the surrounding villages. Over two years since, many including Virendar Prasad, are yet to be compensated, “I have not yet got monetary compensation. Around 5 acres of my land was flooded with slurry. Ash still has not been fully evacuated from it. After the breach, our rice crop was destroyed, and we have not been able to cultivate anything on that portion yet.”
Over 70% of electricity generated in India comes from coal-fired thermal power plants. One of the major by-products of coal combustion is fly ash, a toxic solid waste with a known history of causing environmental pollution and negative health impacts. Depending on the coal, flyash, also known as coal ash, may contain heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium, and selenium, among others. It is a respirable toxin, with linkages to diseases like asthma and tuberculosis.
The ash pond of state-owned Bokaro Power Supply Company Pvt. Ltd. collapsed in May this year, reportedly inundating an entire village of 130 people. In the last decade, India has seen at least 76 such ash-related disasters. Additionally, pollution of air, water, and soil continuously impacts communities close to power plants. The quantity of ash generated annually is immense, and despite efforts by authorities spanning decades, “100% utilization” of flyash remains a pipedream.
Flyash Management – New Modes of Utilization
One of the primary legislations surrounding flyash management in the country is the Fly Ash Utilisation Notification (1999) issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEFCC). The latest amendment was issued on 31st December 2021. As part of ash management efforts, the MoEFCC and the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) also introduced an Office Memorandum and Official Guidelines for the use of flyash in filling of abandoned mine voids, reclamation of lying areas, and as a soil conditioner in agriculture in August 2019.
Since around 2012, the MoEFCC’s Expert Appraisal Committee had predominantly prohibited these means of ash usage through conditions given in the Environmental Clearances (EC) of thermal power plants. The OM now directs that all existing conditions in ECs of thermal power plants that prohibit these uses should be replaced with conditions allowing them. The CPCB guidelines detail the required permissions and procedures to be followed when dumping fly ash in mine voids/low-lying areas.
By calling for a blanket reversal of all such EC conditions, the OM and guidelines are essentially promoting the use of flyash via these modes. The Flyash Notification 2021 also lists the use of flyash via low-lying area reclamation and filling of abandoned mine voids. However, questions of environmental safety, perception of communities living near thermal power plants and/or coal mines, and potential effectiveness of these modes of flyash utilization remain. Insights from a field visit to some sites of ash filling in mine voids and low-lying areas in Bokaro district, Jharkhand have been detailed here.
Bokaro Thermal Power Station – Excessive ash, lack of space
Owned by Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC), BTPS ‘A’ has one unit of 500 MW capacity and BTPS ‘B’ had three units of 210 MW each. It is situated in Bokaro Thermal, Bokaro district, Jharkhand, on the banks of Konar River.
The BTPS ash pond is spread over 50 acres and has nearly exhausted its capacity. The Site-in-charge (SI) of BTPS’s ash pond said, “The ash pond is constructed to accommodate 20% of the ash being generated. The rest is supposed to be stored in dry form and sent elsewhere [for utilisation], so the pond is overfull. In January this year, the plant had to be shut because there was no space for the ash. If no mine voids are found, the plant will have to be shut again.”
According to the Central Electricity Authority’s (CEA) Daily Generation Reports, between March 2019 and March 2022, different units of BTPS have been reported as closed due to ‘ash handling system problems’ five times, sometimes for over a month.
In response to an RTI filed by the author in October last year, DVC authorities provided copies of letters sent by them to Central Coalfields Ltd. (CCL), urgently requesting the allotment of more abandoned coal mines in the Bokaro colliery for ash disposal. They specified that BTPS may not be able to run some units due to the non-availability of ash dumping sites.
Dumping of ash in mine voids threatens potential water sources
To manage the excessive quantities, BTPS has been dumping flyash in mine voids, two of these being the CCL-owned Kargali Opencast Project (OCP) and Bokaro OCP.
Quarry No. 1 of Kargali OCP is located in a populated part of Bermo town, with Damodar River less than 500 m* away. It has been abandoned for some years now and is filled with water. Local activists stated that one segment of this quarry has been filled with ash and soil, with vegetation growing on it. The remaining portion is currently being filled with flyash from BTPS. According to workers at the quarry, between 70-100 trucks of ash are emptied into this quarry during the first shift (6 AM – 2 PM) every day. Layers of soil are then placed on top, until more ash is dumped and the process continues.
Once mining operations have halted, groundwater tends to accumulate in mine pits, as the pumping out of water for mining purposes has stopped. As a result, quarries where mining is over, often act as reservoirs of large quantities of water. Though treatment would be required prior to human consumption, the large quantity provides potential for gainful water use.
A Central Groundwater Board report on the status of groundwater resources of Jharkhand identified coal mining as a major dewatering source in the state. Importantly, it also stated that out of 249 administrative blocks, Bermo block is one of three categorized as “over exploited”, the highest level of depletion.
Local activist Gulab Chandra from the civil society group Damodar Bachao Abhiyan explained, “Bermo has one of the worst groundwater levels in the state. So, many people see the mine pit water as an important potential water source, and fear that filling up mine voids with ash could deprive them of a valuable resource. There is also the concern about contamination of the water due to flyash.”
Another abandoned quarry of Bokaro OCP phase II is located about 2 Km from Kargali OCP. A portion of this was ‘reclaimed’ using ash, and covered with a layer of soil. There is now a plantation of different trees on it, including amla. This is even though the CPCB guidelines state that fruit-bearing trees are to be avoided for plantation purposes on top of land reclaimed using ash.
The filling stopped after 2014, following opposition from locals worried that a potential source of water would be lost. The quarry is now used for fishing purposes, a trend that can be seen in other districts of Jharkhand as well. However, Gulab Chandra mentioned that the fish from this waters gets sold at lesser rates than others in the market, for the reason that it is grown in a mine. Filling the voids with ash could not only pose a threat to health of people consuming such fish, but also potentially impact the livelihood opportunities that such a water source presents.
Ash Dumping in violation of CPCB guidelines
The CPCB guidelines mention that adequate drains are to be provided at mine void sites for preventing surface runoff and supernatant water from flowing into nearby areas – no such drains were visible at either Kargali OCP or Bokaro OCP phase II. Further, the guidelines also state that a ‘clearance of 500 m of safe distance’ needs to be maintained between water bodies and rivers in case of ash disposal in mine voids. Both the quarries visited by us are located less than 500 m away from Damodar River (distance measured using Google Earth).
In cases where MoEFCC previously allowed the dumping of ash in abandoned mine voids, specific environmental safeguards were required, such as an impermeable lining for preventing leaching of heavy metals from flyash into groundwater. The new CPCB guidelines however, make no mention of any mandatory liner/impermeable layer.
BTPS has been dumping ash in ‘low-lying’ areas as well. We visited one such large ash dumping site at a distance of about 0.5 Km from the Konar Dam reservoir boundary wall. The road to the site was lined with several small to medium dumps of flyash. These were uncovered and merely dumped in the open, around trees. Even if this was for use in filling at a later stage, the extent of flyash recklessly spread across the route is a cause of worry.
Tenughat TPS – low-lying land reclamation or indiscriminate dumping?
Tenughat Thermal Power Station (TTPS), located in Lalpaniya, Bokaro district, is owned by the Jharkhand state government’s Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Limited. It has an installed capacity of 420 MW and is situated near its water source, the Tenughat reservoir.
Rehan used to live in Jala Gaon, where now stand the power plant’s smokestacks. In addition to issues of land acquisition, the pollution from the plant’s ash pond and ash dumps have long burdened the local people. “In summer a lot of flyash settles in nearby villages, even reached villages 3-4 Km away from the ash pond. In the monsoon, it mixes with the rainwater and flows into nearby fields as slurry. We are fed up with it,” Rehan said.
Located along railway tracks passing through Lalpaniya is Jhari Basti, a settlement surrounded by large ash dumps. Plant authorities have disposed flyash here over the years, with some dumps about 25-30 feet above ‘ground’ level. Old dumps covered with soil, and new dumps with flyash on top can be seen on either side of the tracks. These are less than 1 Km from the houses.
Ash from the ‘low-lying area reclamation’ dumps, settles on standing crop, adversely affecting the yields. It also settles on people’s homes, vehicles, and water storage containers. Rajesh Sahu, a resident of Jhari Basti said, “Previously ash has even deposited in the village well. Three buffalos have died after getting stuck in the ash slurry during monsoon time. The ash [from the dumps] has made our land banjar [non-cultivable]. We have not been able to successfully farm for three years now, since the dumping started.”
Satellite imagery over the last three years shows the expansion of two ash dumps in the locality. At least 12 families have been resisting the impact of pollution on their lives by writing to local authorities (SDO), but they have not received relief so far. The locals mentioned that at least 13 other such large ash dumps exist across the region.
The objective of ‘reclaiming’ low-lying land with any material, including flyash, is typically to bring an area in lower elevation up to the surrounding ground level. The dumps seen in Lalpaniya however, seem to tower above the surrounding homes and fields instead.
TTPS ‘Low-lying area’ ash dumps cause of long drawn pollution
The objective of ‘reclaiming’ low-lying land with any material, including flyash, is typically to bring an area in lower elevation up to the surrounding ground level. The dumps seen in Lalpaniya however, seem to tower above the surrounding homes and fields instead.
A sub-committee of the MoEFCC’s Expert Appraisal Committee visited the areas around Tenughat TPS in December 2017. The sub-committee’s report made note of multiple violations of environment clearance conditions by the power plant. The proposal for expansion of the plant was rejected basis these environmental concerns. Among others, multiple flyash related issues were noted – excessive dumping of flyash around plant areas, the exhausted capacity of ash pond, and visibility of ash dumps through satellite imagery as seen by the committee members. It noted “…This open dumping of flyash poses serious threat to the water reservoir as the runoff during monsoon will carry flyash and heavy metals and eventually joins the reservoir.”
Crucially, the report recommended that the dumps are to be removed immediately. From the situation at Lalpaniya, it is apparent this has not been implemented over four years since the submission of this report. No adequate environmental safeguards appear to be in place for preventing pollution via airborne ash, or ash slurry.
The CPCB guidelines state that ‘suitable’ methods should be adopted during excavation, transport and filling of ash in mine voids or low-lying areas. In the dumps seen at Lalpaniya, there appeared to be no safeguards such as drains to prevent runoff or water sprinkling to prevent fugitive emissions. At the ash pond of TTPS, ash being transported in uncovered trucks was also seen.
Data from the CEA’s Flyash Generation and Utilisation report for 2020-2021 states that Tenughat TPS ‘utilised’ 0.47 million tonnes of flyash, reporting a 92% use of all ash generated by the plant. The plant has reportedly utilised all of this ash for ‘low-lying area reclamation.’ The use of ash for this purpose is listed as an ‘eco-friendly’ mode in the Flyash Utilisation Notification 2021. The experiences of people living near these dumps and rampant pollution, however, suggest that the mode ought to be described rather differently.
New modes fraught with risks, scrutiny essential
The two modes – filling ash in low-lying areas and empty mine voids are receiving a renewed push, despite a cautious stance displayed by authorities in the past. As seen with the new Flyash Utilisation Notification 2021, the OM and guidelines seem to be another attempt of ensuring ‘100% utilisation’ of flyash. The issues in Bokaro and Lalpaniya highlight that environmental safety and prevention of pollution still remain gaps in the implementation of these modes of ash usage. Amidst discussions of ‘just transitions’ and moving away from fossil fuel based electricity generation, it is crucial to understand the ongoing and potential impacts of coal’s legacy of flyash.
Notes:
– Some names of people have been changed
– The visit to Jharkhand was made in April 2022
– All photographs used here have been clicked by the author
– Read the full report published by Manthan Adhyayan Kendra here
Sehr's Work Blog 