Thiruvananthapuram / Kochi: After a lot of dithering, including proposterus claims that his release will have an impact on national security, the Kerala Government finally made the public detailed project report (DPR) from the Semi-speed Semi-Speed ​​Semi-Speed ​​Project.
The report, which runs to more than 3,000 pages spread across six volumes, is basically a long elaboration of important points mentioned in the executive summary which is part of the public domain a few weeks ago.
Apart from the RIM aimed at the Starter Factors and Estimated Volume of Passengers and Income, which experts have dissected and found contracts, the DPR reduced to the possible environmental impact of the project.
The same concern is the availability of raw materials for construction.
The House of Representatives said that the Silverline project needed around 28.60,000 (28.6L) stone meter cubic meters, equivalent to 10 lakh tons of stone ballasts.
Experts, however, consider this conservative estimate – for embankments only, one expert takes into account the requirements of 35 lakh cubic stone ballasts and 100 red cubic cubic meters.
The House of Representatives said that for land work material, the mine will be identified locally along the track, one in every 75 to 100 km stretch along the corridor, which experts say is an idea that is not so decent.
Bulk must be obtained from the mine in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, the most complicated proposition and one is exacerbated by the fact that these countries themselves are cracked on unnecessary excavations.
The House of Representatives also stayed at the length of how a large amount of land work involved will affect the hydrological environment because the tracks will cut all rivers, flow, agricultural land and floodland.
The proposed dikeholder will cause obstruction to the smooth flow of downstream water and increase the flow of mud.
Increased soil erosion will inhibit water quality and increase commitment and will result in increased surface flow and flood.
Kollam and Kasaragod (stations and pages) have been identified as the most vulnerable hydrological impact.
Environmental experts show that while the House of Representatives includes a bad impact, there is no serious effort to find a solution or step of improvement.