| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:37 pm Post subject: Ram Setu - Replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on geotec |
 |
|
Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on geotechnical, oceanographic, environmental studies
Forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on
geotechnical, oceanographic, environmental studies
http://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/07/setu-project-replies-to-arguments-of.html
Geological Survey of India, the premier earthsciences
organisation together with National Institute of
Oceanography, Goa, the premier oceanography organisation
should be involved in any study as was done in Tehri dam
case by appointing an advocates' commission.
It is surprising that for the Setu channel, these
organisations were not involved as consultants for geo-
scientific studies including oceanographic investigations
before approving the channel project.
Some arguments were made by UOI counsel Nariman on 24 and
25 July about geo-scientific studides related to SSCP.
Replies to these arguments are submitted. Former Directors
of Geological Survey of India Dr. K. Gopalakrishnan, Dr. S.
Badrinarayanan and Dr. K Subramanian had made the following
submissions which are also made available to the SC:
1. Geological and Geo-tectonic Setting of the Palk Bay --
Gulf of mannar area -- Their relevance to SSCP
2. Rama Sethu -- Geographical, Geological, Historical and
Geo-Archaeological Perspectives (These two reports are
submitted personally to CEP)
3. Ocean Current Movements in Palk Bay -- Gulf of Mannar
region and their significance in relation to SSCP
4. Comments on the report of the committee of Eminent
Persons on SSCP(Presented as a separate volume entitled
"Geological Aspects of SSCP".
References to these documents are made in the following
point-wise comments made by Dr. K. S. Gopalakrishnan
Mr. Nariman has stated that 'a geological survwey in the
area had not thrown up any evidence to suggest that Rama
Sethu was a man-made structure'
Mr.Nariman has cleverly not mentioned what geological
evidences were searched for to suggest a man-made structure
at Rama Sethu, which were not found.
On the other hand our report under reference-2 above
clearly brings about evidences for the occurrence of a
Boulder-Conglomerate bed having different rock types such
as calcareous sandstone, fossiliferous limestone and
corals, between a loose beach sand horizon at the top and
another loose sand formation below the boulder bed. Such
boulder beds are nowhere reported along the southern Tamil
Nadu coast. Also this boulder bed occurs perpendicular to
the coast. This type of boulder beds can not be formed by
any marine sedimentary process. It is significant that
Valmiki Ramayana describes that the Rama Sethi was built by
using huge rocks and trees available on the coast. As such
occurrence of this type of boulder bed at Rama Sethu proves
it to be not by normal sedimentary process by only by a
human hand.
Elsewhere Mr. Nariman is reported to have said that "we
believe that the bridge is not man-made structure but a
super-man made structure".
Does this mean that the Govt. accepts that there is a
bridge structure on Rama Sethu that is not by sedimentary
process and that it was built by the super-man Rama who is
an avatar of God?
Nariman has also stated that the project was not rushed
through and that each and every aspect was considered in
depth at various levels by expert committees and only after
all requirements were required (acquired?), was clearance
given.
In the reports submitted to CEP, we had clearly brought out
that the three geo-scientific aspects, viz., Geotechnical
Evaluation Studies, Geo-Environmental Assessment Studies
and the Nature of Current Movements in the entire Project
area and its environs, have not been studied at all in
depth, covering all aspects in each of the above three
spheres, by any competent agencies.
The geo-technical studies restricted only to the canals and
channels of SSCP were done by NIOT, but not for the whole
project area. Also these studies did not take into account
the important aspects such as recent fault movements,
earth- tremors, higher heat flow in the area and possible
volcanic activity etc. Neo-tectonic activities (recent
earth movements) associated with faulting during 1948-49
had caused submergence and subsidence of southern parts of
Dhanushkodi town ship was brought out by GSI>s studies.
Recurrence of such activities will affect the Rama Sethu
canal>s stability. Similarly, the neo-tectonic activity
with subsidence in the Palk Bay along the extensions of
the Vellar river fault as brought out by GSI may affect the
ENE trending section of channel/canal. This aspect has also
not been studied by NIOT or any other agency. These aspects
have been cited in our report under Reference-1 above.
No detailed Geo-environmental studies for the entire
project area and its environ was carried out by NEERI.
Whatever geo-scientific studies carried out by NEERI, and
that too only in Palk Bay relates to rates of
sedimentation. Actually, NEERI does not possess the
expertise to carry out any GEO-Environmental Studies. Only
GSI has got the core competence for study of six geological
parameters, viz., geology, geo-morphology, soil, land-use,
surface water and ground water, out of the specified 12
parameters earmarked by the Dept. of Environment, Govt. of
India, for the purpose of environmental clearance (See p.44
of GSI pamphlet entitled 'Annals and Antiquity of GSI,2002,
included in Refence-4 above).
No studies on current movements for the project area as a
whole were carried out by competent agency like, NIO, NIOT
or the Marine Wing of GSI. Our paper under reference 3,
derived from Google Earth photos, clearly brings out the
fact that in the western sector, the currents from Palk Bay
converge on the Pamban channel (about 2.5 km wide and about
5m deep) and move with force to Gulf of Mannar side, where
they are deflected by the coralline islands to west and SW
towards the southern Tamil Nadu coast. On the other hand,
in the central sector, the currents stopped somewhat by the
Rama Sethu , overflow into Gulf of Mannar and produce a
swirling structure with sediments. If the proposed narrow
and deep SSCP canal (300m x 12m) across Rama Sethu is cut,
it will bring in erosion and destabilization of the canal
itself, besides further heavy devastations in the Gulf
destroying the marine life in those parts. Also, due this
activity, the orientation and force of current movements
will change drastically in the gulf, which will prevent
deposition of future heavy mineral placer sands with
monazite, rutile, ilmenite etc along our southern coast.
They may even destroy and remove the already existing
deposits of such minerals from our shores to the deep ocean
back.
Mr.Nariman is reported to have said that 'each and every
aspect was considered in depth at various levels by expert
committees and only after all requirements were acquired,
was clearance given'.
It is not known whether any geo-scientific and marine
experts were included in these expert committees.
It can be seen that the Final Detailed Project Report by
L&T Ramboll Consulting Engineers have submitted their
report in Feb. 2005 itself, before the receipt of or data
from such important reports such as (i) Marine geophysical
surveys carried out for the Proposed Sethusamudram
Navigational Channel by NIOT (Feb.2005), (ii) Geological
and Geo-technical Assessment of the sub-sea strata for the
proposed Sethusamudram Navigational Channel by NIOT (April,
2005), and (iii) Final report on conducting Bore-hole
investigations along SSC alignment at Adam>s Bridge by
Fugro Geo-tech Ltd, April, 2007).
Environmental clearance letter from MoE&F has been issued
on 31.03. 2005 itself without the Geotechnical report from
NIOT (April, 2005) and the report form Fugro Geo-tech Ltd
(April, 2007).
Similarly many other important reports such as (a) Report
on Geological Studies and Sub-surface strata conditions at
the site of Sethusamudram canal in the vicinity of
Rameswaram and Dhanushkodi by Dr. S.P.Subramaiam, Dept. of
Ocean Engineering, IIT, Madras (no date), (b) A Report on
the feasibility of underwater drilling and controlled
blasting of SSCP by Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad (No
date), and (c) Study of Rock Mechanics Properties of
sandstone samples collected from SSCP (Name of author or
organization not mentioned; letter dated 30 August, 2007)
are received very recently after the commissioning of the
project.
(The details regarding the dates of receipt s of various
reports stated above are taken from the report of ECP.
Please also see the reference -4 above; part-1, letter to
Dr. Kalyana Raman).
The major doubts and apprehensions raised by Dr. Tad. S.
Murthy, the international "Tsunami Expert" regarding the
orientations of SSCP canals vis-à-vis the future tsunami
waves, which were forwarded by PM>s Office to SSCP
authorities were brushes aside by the Tuticorin Port Trust
that has no expertise in the field of tsunamis without any
technical explanations.
Contrary to the submission of Mr. Nariman to the court, it
can be seen from the above facts that the project was
rushed through without even waiting for many of the reports
commissioned by SSCP authorities themselves. No renowned
geo-scientific, oceanographic or tsunami experts were
included in the various expert committees. Many scientific
aspects were not considered and tackled by SSCP authorities
before starting the project.
The contention of Mr. Nariman that the proposal of
Alignment No.6 was the result of a comprehensive and
careful examination of all relevant considerations, backed
by sound environmental, navigational, engineering and
trans-boundary considerations etc., does not also stand to
reason, without proper geo-technical, geo-environmental and
ocean current studies supported by mathematical, scle and
computer generated modeling studies by competent agencies.
End of forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
harmony
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:42 am Post subject: Re: Ram Setu - Replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on ge |
|
|
is nariman a hindu?
there is a trend in goi to use monotheist forces to denigrate hindu leaders
and monuments.
these are divine rocks that float. there is a saying in hindu to the effect
that raam ji>s name makes a rock float.
<usenet@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20080729ON1259g6E57Dis26jmmQ7F1@AkVi6...
[quote]Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on geotechnical,
oceanographic, environmental studies
Forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on
geotechnical, oceanographic, environmental studies
http://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/07/setu-project-replies-to-arguments-of.html
Geological Survey of India, the premier earthsciences
organisation together with National Institute of
Oceanography, Goa, the premier oceanography organisation
should be involved in any study as was done in Tehri dam
case by appointing an advocates' commission.
It is surprising that for the Setu channel, these
organisations were not involved as consultants for geo-
scientific studies including oceanographic investigations
before approving the channel project.
Some arguments were made by UOI counsel Nariman on 24 and
25 July about geo-scientific studides related to SSCP.
Replies to these arguments are submitted. Former Directors
of Geological Survey of India Dr. K. Gopalakrishnan, Dr. S.
Badrinarayanan and Dr. K Subramanian had made the following
submissions which are also made available to the SC:
1. Geological and Geo-tectonic Setting of the Palk Bay --
Gulf of mannar area -- Their relevance to SSCP
2. Rama Sethu -- Geographical, Geological, Historical and
Geo-Archaeological Perspectives (These two reports are
submitted personally to CEP)
3. Ocean Current Movements in Palk Bay -- Gulf of Mannar
region and their significance in relation to SSCP
4. Comments on the report of the committee of Eminent
Persons on SSCP(Presented as a separate volume entitled
"Geological Aspects of SSCP".
References to these documents are made in the following
point-wise comments made by Dr. K. S. Gopalakrishnan
Mr. Nariman has stated that 'a geological survwey in the
area had not thrown up any evidence to suggest that Rama
Sethu was a man-made structure'
Mr.Nariman has cleverly not mentioned what geological
evidences were searched for to suggest a man-made structure
at Rama Sethu, which were not found.
On the other hand our report under reference-2 above
clearly brings about evidences for the occurrence of a
Boulder-Conglomerate bed having different rock types such
as calcareous sandstone, fossiliferous limestone and
corals, between a loose beach sand horizon at the top and
another loose sand formation below the boulder bed. Such
boulder beds are nowhere reported along the southern Tamil
Nadu coast. Also this boulder bed occurs perpendicular to
the coast. This type of boulder beds can not be formed by
any marine sedimentary process. It is significant that
Valmiki Ramayana describes that the Rama Sethi was built by
using huge rocks and trees available on the coast. As such
occurrence of this type of boulder bed at Rama Sethu proves
it to be not by normal sedimentary process by only by a
human hand.
Elsewhere Mr. Nariman is reported to have said that "we
believe that the bridge is not man-made structure but a
super-man made structure".
Does this mean that the Govt. accepts that there is a
bridge structure on Rama Sethu that is not by sedimentary
process and that it was built by the super-man Rama who is
an avatar of God?
Nariman has also stated that the project was not rushed
through and that each and every aspect was considered in
depth at various levels by expert committees and only after
all requirements were required (acquired?), was clearance
given.
In the reports submitted to CEP, we had clearly brought out
that the three geo-scientific aspects, viz., Geotechnical
Evaluation Studies, Geo-Environmental Assessment Studies
and the Nature of Current Movements in the entire Project
area and its environs, have not been studied at all in
depth, covering all aspects in each of the above three
spheres, by any competent agencies.
The geo-technical studies restricted only to the canals and
channels of SSCP were done by NIOT, but not for the whole
project area. Also these studies did not take into account
the important aspects such as recent fault movements,
earth- tremors, higher heat flow in the area and possible
volcanic activity etc. Neo-tectonic activities (recent
earth movements) associated with faulting during 1948-49
had caused submergence and subsidence of southern parts of
Dhanushkodi town ship was brought out by GSI>s studies.
Recurrence of such activities will affect the Rama Sethu
canal>s stability. Similarly, the neo-tectonic activity
with subsidence in the Palk Bay along the extensions of
the Vellar river fault as brought out by GSI may affect the
ENE trending section of channel/canal. This aspect has also
not been studied by NIOT or any other agency. These aspects
have been cited in our report under Reference-1 above.
No detailed Geo-environmental studies for the entire
project area and its environ was carried out by NEERI.
Whatever geo-scientific studies carried out by NEERI, and
that too only in Palk Bay relates to rates of
sedimentation. Actually, NEERI does not possess the
expertise to carry out any GEO-Environmental Studies. Only
GSI has got the core competence for study of six geological
parameters, viz., geology, geo-morphology, soil, land-use,
surface water and ground water, out of the specified 12
parameters earmarked by the Dept. of Environment, Govt. of
India, for the purpose of environmental clearance (See p.44
of GSI pamphlet entitled 'Annals and Antiquity of GSI,2002,
included in Refence-4 above).
No studies on current movements for the project area as a
whole were carried out by competent agency like, NIO, NIOT
or the Marine Wing of GSI. Our paper under reference 3,
derived from Google Earth photos, clearly brings out the
fact that in the western sector, the currents from Palk Bay
converge on the Pamban channel (about 2.5 km wide and about
5m deep) and move with force to Gulf of Mannar side, where
they are deflected by the coralline islands to west and SW
towards the southern Tamil Nadu coast. On the other hand,
in the central sector, the currents stopped somewhat by the
Rama Sethu , overflow into Gulf of Mannar and produce a
swirling structure with sediments. If the proposed narrow
and deep SSCP canal (300m x 12m) across Rama Sethu is cut,
it will bring in erosion and destabilization of the canal
itself, besides further heavy devastations in the Gulf
destroying the marine life in those parts. Also, due this
activity, the orientation and force of current movements
will change drastically in the gulf, which will prevent
deposition of future heavy mineral placer sands with
monazite, rutile, ilmenite etc along our southern coast.
They may even destroy and remove the already existing
deposits of such minerals from our shores to the deep ocean
back.
Mr.Nariman is reported to have said that 'each and every
aspect was considered in depth at various levels by expert
committees and only after all requirements were acquired,
was clearance given'.
It is not known whether any geo-scientific and marine
experts were included in these expert committees.
It can be seen that the Final Detailed Project Report by
L&T Ramboll Consulting Engineers have submitted their
report in Feb. 2005 itself, before the receipt of or data
from such important reports such as (i) Marine geophysical
surveys carried out for the Proposed Sethusamudram
Navigational Channel by NIOT (Feb.2005), (ii) Geological
and Geo-technical Assessment of the sub-sea strata for the
proposed Sethusamudram Navigational Channel by NIOT (April,
2005), and (iii) Final report on conducting Bore-hole
investigations along SSC alignment at Adam>s Bridge by
Fugro Geo-tech Ltd, April, 2007).
Environmental clearance letter from MoE&F has been issued
on 31.03. 2005 itself without the Geotechnical report from
NIOT (April, 2005) and the report form Fugro Geo-tech Ltd
(April, 2007).
Similarly many other important reports such as (a) Report
on Geological Studies and Sub-surface strata conditions at
the site of Sethusamudram canal in the vicinity of
Rameswaram and Dhanushkodi by Dr. S.P.Subramaiam, Dept. of
Ocean Engineering, IIT, Madras (no date), (b) A Report on
the feasibility of underwater drilling and controlled
blasting of SSCP by Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad (No
date), and (c) Study of Rock Mechanics Properties of
sandstone samples collected from SSCP (Name of author or
organization not mentioned; letter dated 30 August, 2007)
are received very recently after the commissioning of the
project.
(The details regarding the dates of receipt s of various
reports stated above are taken from the report of ECP.
Please also see the reference -4 above; part-1, letter to
Dr. Kalyana Raman).
The major doubts and apprehensions raised by Dr. Tad. S.
Murthy, the international "Tsunami Expert" regarding the
orientations of SSCP canals vis-à-vis the future tsunami
waves, which were forwarded by PM>s Office to SSCP
authorities were brushes aside by the Tuticorin Port Trust
that has no expertise in the field of tsunamis without any
technical explanations.
Contrary to the submission of Mr. Nariman to the court, it
can be seen from the above facts that the project was
rushed through without even waiting for many of the reports
commissioned by SSCP authorities themselves. No renowned
geo-scientific, oceanographic or tsunami experts were
included in the various expert committees. Many scientific
aspects were not considered and tackled by SSCP authorities
before starting the project.
The contention of Mr. Nariman that the proposal of
Alignment No.6 was the result of a comprehensive and
careful examination of all relevant considerations, backed
by sound environmental, navigational, engineering and
trans-boundary considerations etc., does not also stand to
reason, without proper geo-technical, geo-environmental and
ocean current studies supported by mathematical, scle and
computer generated modeling studies by competent agencies.
End of forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the
educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may
not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name,
current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others
are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the
article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more
information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
