What is the Sharavathi Pumping Storage Project?
The Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) has proposed the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project (PSP), a 2,000 MW hydropower scheme in the Sharavathi Valley, Shivamogga district. The project plans to use the existing Talakalale dam as the upper reservoir and the Gerusoppa dam as the lower reservoir. Water will be pumped uphill during off-peak hours and released downhill to generate electricity during peak demand, to provide grid stability as Karnataka expands its renewable energy portfolio.
According to the project documents submitted on the Parivesh portal, the scheme requires about 153 hectares of land, of which over 140 hectares are forest land. The project falls within the Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) of the Sharavathi Wildlife Sanctuary, which is home to the endangered lion-tailed macaque, hornbills, king cobras, and numerous endemic plant species of the Western Ghats. The proposal includes an underground powerhouse of eight units of 250 MW each, more than 11 km of tunnels, and muck disposal sites spread over nearly 48 hectares.
Problems With the Project
Despite claims of ‘using existing reservoirs’ and ‘minimal impact’, the project entails massive ecological and social disruption.
First, forest loss is inevitable. Over 15,000 trees will be cut in one of the last surviving stretches of tropical evergreen rainforest in the Western Ghats. These trees are part of a continuous canopy critical for species like the lion-tailed macaque, which cannot survive if its arboreal pathways are broken. The tunnels, penstocks, and transmission lines will destroy wildlife corridors and cause further human intrusion.
Second, the hydrological risks are profound. The Sharavathi river is already one of the most heavily dammed rivers in India, with multiple hydroelectric projects upstream. Adding a pumped storage scheme will disturb the natural flow, alter sedimentation patterns, and increase the chances of landslides. The project’s own Terms of Reference admits that no environmental flow (E-flow) study has been conducted, and that carrying-capacity and cumulative-impact assessments are absent. This omission means that the long-term impacts on aquatic life, downstream agriculture, and water availability are not even fully understood.
Third, the project report claims that muck disposal will be confined to private land and that no forest land will be used. Disposing millions of tonnes of excavated muck will almost certainly encroach into forest patches, riversides, and hill slopes, leading to erosion, siltation, and further habitat degradation.
Fourth, the social costs are being grossly underestimated. Official records identify only four families as ‘displaced’ and 130 as ‘affected’. In reality, many more people stand to lose access to forest resources, grazing lands, and river water that sustain their livelihoods. Forest-dependent households, who are not legally recognised as landowners, are excluded from compensation or rehabilitation packages. Villagers also point out that blasting, tunneling, and road-building will disturb their settlements and farming patterns, yet these indirect impacts have not been accounted for.
People’s Concerns and Protests
From the outset, people in Shivamogga and Uttara Kannada districts have opposed the project. At public hearings, villagers highlighted the lack of transparency. The Detailed Project Report and full Environmental Impact Assessment were not made available to them in advance. They accused the government of double standards: while locals face strict restrictions under eco-sensitive zone regulations, a mega-project inside the sanctuary is being fast-tracked.
Environmentalists and scientists have joined these protests, pointing out that the Western Ghats are a UNESCO World Heritage Site and one of the world’s eight ‘hottest hotspots’ of biological diversity. Cutting thousands of trees and blasting tunnels here cannot be justified as renewable energy’. Activists in Bengaluru have held a rally and bike march, online petitions have gathered thousands of signatures demanding that the project be scrapped.
The protests are not based on fear or speculation. They are grounded in the evidence of previous dam projects in the Sharavathi valley, which caused massive forest submergence, landslides, and displacement. People have seen first-hand how promises of minimal damage turn into long-term ecological and social costs that are never compensated. With excessive rains and landslides wreaking havoc in both Western Ghats and Himalayas, it is critical to scrap unchecked developmental projects.
Conclusion
The Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project is being presented as a symbol of Karnataka’s renewable energy ambitions. In reality, it is a project that undermines both nature and people. By placing an energy scheme inside an eco-sensitive wildlife sanctuary, cutting thousands of trees, disregarding downstream hydrological risks, and ignoring affected communities, the government is prioritising short-term power generation over long-term sustainability.
The people of Sharavathi valley are not opposing development; they are opposing the push towards displacement. With alternatives like battery storage and decentralised solutions available, the destruction of a biodiversity hotspot is unjustifiable. The protests against the project are a reminder that true progress cannot come at the expense of forests, rivers, wildlife, and communities who depend on them.
