Kerala’s Fight Against Offshore Mining: An Environmental, Economic, and Strategic Battle
Kerala is witnessing intense protests against the Union Government’s offshore mining plans, which include extraction of construction-grade sand, polymetallic nodules, and even strategic nuclear minerals such as thorium and uranium from seabeds off its coast. Fishermen, environmentalists, and the state government are united in opposing the move, arguing that it threatens marine biodiversity, jeopardizes livelihoods, undermines state rights, and raises national security concerns. The Centre, however, maintains that the project is legally valid, economically beneficial, and environmentally regulated.
Background: From the 2002 Act to 2025 Rules
India’s offshore mining activities are governed by the Offshore Areas Mineral (Development & Regulation) Act, 2002 (OMDR Act), which defines offshore areas as territorial waters, the continental shelf, and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Initially, only central agencies such as the Geological Survey of India (GSI), Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM), and Atomic Minerals Directorate (AMD) could conduct offshore exploration.
In 2023, the Act was amended to allow private sector participation through competitive e-auctions for minerals like polymetallic nodules, lime-mud, and construction sand, aiming to boost domestic mineral production and industrial growth.
The first offshore mining e-auction in November 2023 offered 13 blocks, 3 off Kerala’s Kollam coast, 3 off Gujarat, and 7 off the Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The GSI estimates 745 million tonnes of construction-grade sand off Kerala’s coast, with 300 million tonnes in the Kollam blocks alone, lying at depths of 48–62 metres.
In 2025, the Offshore Areas Atomic Minerals Rules were introduced, enabling private companies to mine nuclear minerals like thorium and uranium offshore. Kerala’s coast holds India’s largest concentration of monazite sands, rich in thorium and rare earth elements, making the state’s coastal belt a strategic resource hub.
Kerala’s Concerns
Kerala’s opposition rests on four key pillars: environmental damage, livelihood loss, governance issues, and strategic resource security.
1. Environmental Risks
-
Sediment plumes from dredging could cloud large areas of water, blocking sunlight penetration into the euphotic zone and disrupting photosynthesis in marine plants.
-
Habitat destruction threatens fish breeding grounds, coral reefs, and marine biodiversity.
-
Toxic substance release from disturbed seabeds could harm marine life and human health.
-
Cumulative impact could worsen coastal erosion, already aggravated by climate change.
2. Livelihood Threats
-
Kerala has 11 lakh fishermen in 222 fishing villages depending on marine resources.
-
Kollam Parappu (Quilon Bank) is one of the most productive fishing zones in the region, mining could sharply reduce fish stocks and obstruct fishing operations.
-
Large mining vessels would pose navigational risks and limit fishing activity, potentially causing a cultural and economic wipe-out for fishing communities.
3. Governance and Federal Rights
-
Offshore areas beyond 12 nautical miles fall exclusively under Central jurisdiction, limiting Kerala’s say in decision-making.
-
The lack of state consultation is seen as a denial of constitutional rights.
-
Public sector enterprises involved in mineral extraction could be sidelined by private players.
4. Strategic Resource and Security Concerns
-
Kerala’s monazite sands are rich in thorium, a potential future fuel for nuclear reactors, and rare earth elements vital for advanced technology.
-
Thorium offers several advantages over uranium, it is more abundant, produces less radioactive waste, and is more proliferation-resistant.
-
Allowing private access to nuclear minerals raises national security questions and risks transferring strategic resource control outside public hands.
The Centre’s Perspective
The Union Government defends the offshore mining plan on the following grounds:
-
Legal authority: Offshore mineral rights beyond 12 nautical miles belong to the Centre under the OMDR Act.
-
Economic development: Offshore minerals are crucial for infrastructure, high-tech manufacturing, and reducing import dependence.
-
Environmental safeguards:
-
130 marine protected areas and 106 Important Coastal & Marine Biodiversity Areas have been excluded from mining.
-
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) will be conducted before operations.
-
-
Community support: The Offshore Areas Mineral Trust will fund ecological restoration and livelihood support.
-
Transparency: Mining rights are allocated via competitive e-auctions to ensure fairness and efficiency.
-
Strategic independence: Domestic production of critical minerals, including thorium and uranium, would strengthen national energy security.
The State’s Perspective
Kerala’s government argues that:
-
Environmental and livelihood damages will outweigh potential benefits.
-
Fishing communities and local industries will bear the brunt, while profits flow elsewhere.
-
The lack of prior consultation undermines cooperative federalism.
-
Strategic minerals like thorium and uranium should remain under strict public control for security and sovereignty reasons.
-
Long-term sustainability demands investment in fisheries, marine conservation, and eco-friendly economic alternatives rather than high-impact mining.
Political and Public Opposition
-
The Kerala Assembly passed a unanimous resolution urging the Centre to withdraw the project.
-
Fishermen’s unions, environmental groups, and political parties across the spectrum have organized protests, rallies, and petitions.
-
Industries Minister P. Rajeeve has called for complete withdrawal of the Offshore Areas Atomic Minerals Rules 2025, citing threats to the marine ecosystem, fish stocks, and national security.
A Clash of Development Models
This conflict is more than a state-Centre dispute, it reflects a deeper tension between two visions of development:
-
Extraction-led growth, focusing on resource exploitation for national industrial and energy security.
-
Sustainability-led development, prioritizing ecological integrity, community livelihoods, and long-term resilience.
As both sides remain firm, the offshore mining issue could become a test case for environmental federalism in India, shaping how natural resource governance is negotiated between the Union and states in the years to come.
Comments
Post a Comment