We have been opposing the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) ever since it was conceived in the mid-1980s. The people of Koodankulam village themselves were misled by false promises such as 10,000 jobs, water from Pechiparai dam in Kanyakumari district, and fantastic development of the region. We tried in vain to tell them that they were being deceived. Without any local support, we could not sustain the anti-Koodankulam movement for too long.
Now the people of Koodankulam know and understand that this is not just a fisherfolk’s problem, they may be displaced, and they have to deal with radioactive poison. Their joining the movement in 2007 has invigorated the campaign now. And (almost) all of us here in the southernmost tip of India oppose the Koodankulam NPP for a few specific reasons:
[1] The KKNPP reactors are being set up without sharing the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Site Evaluation Study and Safety Analysis Report with the people, or the people’s representatives or the press. No public hearing has been conducted for the first two reactors either. There is absolutely no democratic decision-making in or public approval for this project.
[2] The Tamil Nadu Government G.O. 828 (29.4.1991 – Public Works Department) establishes clearly that “area between 2 to 5 km radius around the plant site, [would be] called the sterilization zone.” This means that people in this area could be displaced. But the KKNPP authorities promise orally and on a purely adhoc basis that nobody from the neighboring villages would be displaced. This kind of adhocism and doublespeak causes suspicion and fears of displacement.
[3] More than 1 million people live within the 30 km radius of the KKNPP which far exceeds the AERB (Atomic Energy Regulatory Board) stipulations. It is quite impossible to evacuate this many people quickly and efficiently in case of a nuclear disaster at Koodankulam.
[4] The coolant water and low-grade waste from the KKNPP are going to be dumped in to the sea which will have a severe impact on fish production and catch. This will undermine the fishing industry, push the fisherfolks into deeper poverty and misery and affect the food security of the entire southern Tamil Nadu and southern Kerala.
[5] Even when the KKNPP projects function normally without any incidents and accidents, they would be emitting Iodine 131, 132, 133, Cesium 134, 136, 137 isotopes, strontium, tritium, tellurium and other such radioactive particles into our air, land, crops, cattle, sea, seafood and ground water. Already the southern coastal belt is sinking with very high incidence of cancer, mental retardation, down syndrome, defective births due to private and government sea-sand mining for rare minerals including thorium. The KKNPP will add many more woes to our already suffering people.
[6] The quality of construction and the pipe work and the overall integrity of the KKNPP structures have been called into question by the very workers and contractors who work there in Koodankulam. There have been international concerns about the design, structure and workings of the untested Russian-made VVER-1000 reactors.
[7] The then Minister of State in the Ministry of Environment and Forest Mr.Jairam Ramesh announced a few months ago that the central government had decided not to give permission to KKNPP 3-6 as they were violating the Coastal Regulation Zone stipulations. It is pertinent to ask if KKNPP 1 and 2 are not violating the CRZ terms.
[8] Many political leaders and bureaucrats try to reassure us that there would be no natural disasters in the Koodankulam area. How can they know? How can anyone ever know? The 2004 December tsunami did flood the KKNPP installations. There was a mild tremor in the surrounding villages of Koodankulam on March 19, 2006. On August 12, 2011, there were tremors in 7 districts of Tamil Nadu.
[9] Indian Prime Minster himself has spoken about terrorist threats to India’s nuclear power plants. Most recently, on August 17, 2001, Minister of State for Home, Mr. Mullappally Ramachandran said: “the atomic establishments continue to remain prime targets of the terrorist groups and outfits.”
[10] The important issue of liability for the Russian plants has not been settled yet. Defying the Indian nuclear liability law, Russia insists that the Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA), secretly signed in 2008 by the Indian and Russian governments, precedes the liability law and that Article 13 of the IGA clearly establishes that NPCIL is solely responsible for all claims of damages.
[11] In 1988 the authorities said that the cost estimate of the Koodakulam 1 and 2 projects was Rs. 6,000 crores. In November 1998, they said the project cost would be Rs. 15,500. In 2001, the ministerial group for economic affairs announced that the project cost would be Rs. 13,171 crores and the Indian government would invest Rs. 6,775 crores with the remainder amount
coming in as Russian loan with 4 percent interest. The fuel cost was estimated to be Rs. 2,129 crores which would be entirely Russian loan. No one knows the 2011 figures of any of these expenses. No one cares to tell the Indian public either.
[12] The March 11, 2011 disaster in Fukushima has made it all too clear to the whole world that nuclear power plants are prone to natural disasters and no one can really predict their occurrence. When we cannot effectively deal with a nuclear disaster, it is only prudent to prevent it from occurring. Even the most industrialized and highly advanced country such as Germany has decided to phase out their nuclear power plants by the year 2022.Switzerland has decided to shun nuclear power technology. In a recent referendum, some 90 percent of Italians have voted against nuclear power in their country. Many Japanese prefectures and their governors are closing nuclear power plants in their regions. Both the United States and Russia
have not built a new reactor in their countries for 2-3 decades ever since major accidents occurred at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.
In our own country, Mamta Banerjee government in West Bengal has stopped the Russian nuclear power park project at Haripur in Purba Medhinipur district and taken a position that they do want any nuclear power project in their state. Similarly, the people of Kerala have decided not to host any nuclear power project in their state.
[13] And finally, the Indian government’s mindless insistence on nuclear power, utmost secrecy in all of its nuclear agreements and activities, and its sheer unwillingness to listen to the people’s concerns and fears make us very doubtful about the real benefactors of all this nuclear hoopla. Is it all for us, the people of India? Or for the corporate profits of the Russian, American and French companies? Or for the Indian military? Are the lives and futures of the Indian citizens inferior to all these?
****
____________________________________________
S.P. Udayakumar, Ph.D.
* People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE)
* National Alliance of Anti-nuclear Movements (NAAM)
(For a Nuclear-Free India that has
No Deals, No Mines, No Reactors, No Dumps, and No Bombs)
42/27 Esankai Mani Veethy, Parakkai Road Jn.,
Nagercoil 629 002, Tamil Nadu, India
Mobile: 91-98656-83735
Write to the Editor
DiaNuke.org on Twitter
Facebook Group
DiaNuke.org on Youtube
shall u give the design structures of this plant
Peoples war always win
Solidarity with the anti-nuke movement at Koodankulam
It is time people who share the same feelings and support the cause to come together. The national media especially the visual media who have turned a blind eye, should be brought to the venue. The common people should be given the same details the as the committee members.
It is time people who share the same feelings and support the cause to come together. The national media especially the visual media who have turned a blind eye, should be brought to the venue. The common people should be given the same details the as the committee members.Dr.Surendran,s mail id please.
know the real facts before commenting, know the indian energy scenario in future,the developed countries has resources&technologies for power but we donot, first know the standards,safety measures & clearances that had taken. you know safety had been given the highest priority.
If nuclear reactors in india are safe then construct a nuclear power plant in Delhi to provide electricity who consumes more.We dont want to be a part of superpower india,we want only the safe india with peacful life.All public projects in india done without any public interest & simply approves for bribe.,Can any politicians or any goverment officials say any one 100% perfect government projects.We are used to live with problems
If terror is problem to construct power plants in north india then why they have power plants in rajasthan & Gujarat.If National capital Delhi is not safe for security then how the other parts of india is safe.We have our vote wepoen ,please pressurise the politicians to stop this activity immediately.
For vote they will do anything .
before searching reasons why no nuclear power search for why only nuclear power i think you will get 113 reasons………these vver1000 reactors were tested,run and decommisioned with out asingle incident of safety breech….
Very good.Your reply is very informative & patriotic.Can you provide your permanent address ,so government of india is happy to built a safe nuclear power plant to your home (to built peoples confidence).We accept for development some compromise we have to do but not with life .Are you ready to sacrifice your life(Sorry but atleast your sophasticated life) for the sake of our country ..Can you share your public contribution so i can make my mind to contribute for india.
You are publishing only pro-agitation comments.
I had posted a comment earlier.
It is posted again. Publish it if you are really neutral.
NUCLEAR ENERGY – HOW MUCH BAD IT IS ?
THE HINDU ( 13.6.11) Editorial " Radiation and Thyroid Cancer" is yet another media response based on ill informed and biased "knowledge", driven by the general fear psychosis of unknown threat.
The study cited in the Editorial on Chernobyl accident is a very narrow one. For a comprehensive study of people involving all the 240,000 liquidators, 116,000 highly exposed evacuees and the 270,000 residents of the Strictly Controlled Zone around the Chernobyl Reactor, please see the Links given below. These are the reports of studies conducted by independent scientists on behalf of World Health Organisation and Chernobyl Forum.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs303/e…
http://www.greenfacts.org/en/chernobyl/l-3/2-heal…
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Chernob…
From these Reports the following are the conclusions on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, which was the worst Nuclear accident ever happened and classified as Level-7 in the IAEA Nuclear incident Scale 1 to 7 :
1. Effect due to Acute Radiation Syndrome :
Out of the 134 employees and rescue workers who were exposed to the highest radiation due to direct exposure to gamma radiation of spent fuel and suffered Acute Radiation Syndrome, only 28 people have died due to the radiation effect. Another 19 have died. But these deaths are not attributable to ARS.
This is the most vulnerable group. Even then till date, the vast majority (106 out of 134 ) did not die of radiation effect. This is one of the conclusive proofs that radiation is not all that dangerous as spread out to be by the media and believed by innocent public.
2. Effect due to Radioactive Iodine (I- 131) intake :
Out of the 5000 Thyroid cancers detected in all due to intake of Radioactive Iodine among the children who were in the age group of 0-18 during the time of accident ( April 26, 1986), in the entire region covering more than 50 million people, only 15 have died due to the cancer effect. Rest all have responded well to the thyroid treatment and are out of danger.
The beneficial effect of non-radioactive Iodine ( I-129) intake in case of nuclear incidents, especially for children has been known for years and it was very well implemented after Chernobyl accident. The statement in THE HINDU that " these measures, which were unfortunately not taken after the Chernobyl accident, have been adopted post- Fukushima " is incorrect. Most of the children in Pipyat city near to Chernobyl were given Iodine tablet within 30 hours of accident. This has considerably helped to reduce the incidence of Thyroid cancer. In fact, if the intake of milk produced from the cows in that region had been avoided, it would have still reduced the Thyroid cancer risk.
Please note, out of this 5000, some would have got thyroid cancer in normal course like in any other population even without the Chernobyl accident.
Also, the region around Chernobyl is a known Iodine deficient region. Hence, there was higher level of radioactive Iodine intake among the children at the time of exposure. Otherwise, this many children would not have been affected. For people like us who are regularly taking Iodised salt, this radioactive Iodine intake will be less and hence I-131 effect will be lesser.
3. Leukaemia and Non-Thyroid Solid Cancer :
Reviews by the WHO Expert Group revealed no evidence of increased cancer risks, apart from thyroid cancer, that can clearly be attributed to radiation from Chernobyl. There has been increase in the leukaemia case only among the 134 acutely exposed liquidators. From the studies of Japanese Atomic Bomb survivors ( Hiroshima & Nagasaki), it has been concluded that the majority of cancer should have appeared by now, after about 20 years of radiation exposure. So, there is very little scope for further development of Leukaemia and solid cancer.
4. What about long term Effects ?
Now that 25 years have elapsed since the accident. Totally only 43 ( 28 + 15 ) people have died of cancer caused by the accident. The next question is, how many more will die premature( it could be even 1 month !) due to the radiation caused by this accident ? It has been estimated that there will be about 5000 people among the 626,000 people referred above, who may eventually die of cancer caused by this accident. It represents about 3-4% increase than normal.
Among the 5 million people who were living in Belarus region which had Cesium deposition of 37 KBq per square meter, an additional cancer death of about 5000 had been predicted based on scientific model. This represents an increase of 0.6% over the normal value. The effect in all other areas including Europe and Russian Federation will naturally be much smaller due to very low levels of radiation dose received.
Please note, these are only probabilities and not conclusive. However there is absolutely no possibility for upward revision of these numbers ( 5000+ 5000) as evidenced from the no radiation effect on the 106 people who were acutely exposed.
5. What about other diseases like Cataracts, Cardiovascular Disease ?
There has been increased level of cataract in early ages. But no major health effects due to this.
The Cardiovascular effect has been noticed among the emergency workers who were acutely exposed. The risk probability is high among those who were exposed in the chest, affecting heart. Since most of the people would have been wearing protective shields, this risk is minimum.
6. What about the Reproductive and hereditary effects and Child mortality ?
Given the low radiation doses received by most people exposed to the Chernobyl accident except those 134 people, no effects on fertility, number of stillbirths, adverse pregnancy outcomes or delivery complications have been demonstrated nor are there expected to be any.
In conclusion, so far in all only 43 deaths are due to the Chernobyl accident and in future – that is, after 25 years of the accident, about 10,000 people's death may be attributable to this accident. This includes those deaths which are likely to be accelerated even by few months than the normal life expectancy.
The facts and figures given above are all based on scientifically studied reports. These are the only neutral Reports which are based on authentic studies conducted on the entire affected population. These are Reports which are written without any prejudice to prove or disprove that Nuclear Energy is safe or otherwise.
There are thousands of other Reports like the one quoted in the Editorial which are subjective studies conducted to "highlight" the " ill effects" of Nuclear Energy and to prove that nuclear energy is unsafe as they have been fearing from childhood or as told by their parents.
Now, of late there are “experts” who come out with the concept of “ Internal ” and “External ” radiation as if it is not known to the Nuclear experts. They say, the damage due to the continuous irradiation of tissues by radioactive particles which are inside the body is more and it should not be compared with the radiation dose received by gamma rays externally.
It is perfectly correct and that is how the cancer probability based on the Iodine and Cesium intake are estimated. These two are the two main radioactive elements which will come out in the event of breach in the fuel clad. Rest all elements like Plutonium, Uranium, Neptunium, etc, which when go into the body stay long and give appreciable dose to the body, do not come out to atmosphere as they are heavy elements. Without knowing these fundamentals many argue that Uranium and Plutonium when they go into the body will emit radiation for 240,000 years ( as if he is going to live for 240,000 years !) and hence it also needs to be accounted.
Apart from the Chernobyl accident discussed above in detail, in the history of 60 years of nuclear energy, so far there were only 2 other major accidents including the latest Fukushima accident and these are discussed below :
1. Three Mile Island Accident :
There was some partial Nuclear Reactor Core melting in Reactor No.2 in the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant, USA due to Loss Of Coolant Accident ( LOCA). There was not a single fatality. There was no major release of radioactivity except the release of short lived radioactive gases like Krypton-85, Xenon-133, etc and about 15 curies of Iodine into the air. It was classified as Level-5. There was almost negligible radiation effect for the human beings or for the environment. But still it became a world famous accident !
It is quite interesting to know how the Three Mile Island accident became so famous. There were three factors.
One, coincidentally just 13 days before this accident, a movie titled “ China Syndrome” had been released. In this movie they had described how a nuclear accident can bring in “catastrophic consequences”. They had postulated and made the general public to believe that a nuclear fuel core melting accident in a US reactor can penetrate the earth and come out at the opposite side of earth, some where in China ! And hence the name China Syndrome ! Even a High School student can conclusively say that it is an absurd imagination. But still the movie was fresh in the minds of UA public and hence the fear associated with this accident was amplified.
The second factor – due to the initial misunderstanding of the real nature of the accident by the plant people, they could not give the correct assessment of the situation for almost a day.
The third factor – due to the limited technical competency of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) members, on whom the US Government and the media had more faith than the plant people, there was total miscommunication to the media and the Government. For example, at one point, by mistake NRC informed the Press that the radiation is leaking out of a 3 feet thick concrete wall and it is measured 100 times more than the allowed limit at a distance of one mile from the plant ! Actually nothing of that sort was possible at all and it was completely an editorial mistake in the press note released by NRC.
Similarly at another point during the course of accident reporting, NRC informed that the radiation level was 1200 mRem/ Hr at ground level at few KM away from the plant. But actually it was measured by a Helicopter hovering at the top of the Stack( Chimney) which was releasing the short lived radioactive gases. The radioactivity by these gases when they were dispersed out as a plume and when they reached the ground level, it was hardly above the normal back ground level !
Also there were conflicting directions given by the local government based on NRC recommendations- first evacuation – followed by stay in doors – and again evacuation of children and pregnant women, etc.
This kind of responses from NRC triggered panic among not only the general public, but also the Government authorities, including the Governor of the State( equivalent to our Chief Minister ) and the President of USA. Added to this, there were too many press people getting information from too many authorities, most of them being non-technical people !
In my opinion, if our AERB ( equivalent of the NRC of USA ) is made up of Non-Nuclear outside experts ( Non- DAE persons) in the name of making it an independent Regulatory Authority, a similar situation will happen in India during any such crisis situations ! For example, the Director of an IIT can never be a match to an engineer who has gone through the BARC Training School and worked in DAE for 25 years. For that matter, this is applicable for any Regulatory Authority associated with a profession – more so, in highly technical areas like Nuclear Energy.
But for these three factors explained above, no one would have heard of Three Mile Island accident outside USA. Definitely there would be no one from the current young generation of people, who all quote and talk about the “ catastrophic accident ” of TMI now, will know about it at all. Most people simply quote it since others are quoting. No one really knows what really happened and what the real consequence of this accident was !
2. Fukushima Accident :
Firstly, it is not equal to the Chernobyl accident, even though the Japanese have declared it as Level -7, the most severe accident that can happen to any reactor, with widespread contamination with serious health and environmental effects. Actually, Fukushima accident qualifies for Level – 5 or at the max 6 only. This means, it is not as severe as the Chernobyl accident. Since the accident was developing slowly, there was increasing severity day by day and it was a cumulative effect of three reactor accidents, the Japanese probably thought that it is better to anticipate the worst and declare the worst level upfront. That is how they would have skipped the Level-6 while upgrading the levels one by one.
So far there is not a single casualty due to this nuclear accident. But more than 20,000 have been reported to have died due to tsunami. Many of the common people have mixed up both tsunami and Fukushima accident due to the media hype on the nuclear incident ignoring the real disaster associated with the tsunami.
So far there is no thyroid affected children who have been identified. The fact is that the quantity of I -131 which has been released into the air is much less, about 6 to 9% only, compared to that of Chernobyl, which had the fuel completely exposed to atmosphere and literally spewed radioactive material into the air for nine days. Chernobyl was a 1000 MWe reactor and the capacity of all the three reactors of Fukushima put together was almost same at 1317 MWe ( 439 *3).
Even the much talked about Hydrogen explosion in Fukushima needs to be proved beyond doubt, since the quantity of Hydrogen can not be so much that even after dilution with so much steam, it could have reached above the 4% concentration level for auto ignition to take place. Moreover, for auto ignition to take place, we need sufficient Oxygen. Temperature also has to be above 5000C. Where was so much Oxygen ? The explosion of the outside reactor buildings in all the three Units of Fukushima could be possibly due to the simple steam pressure build up also.
Since the Reactor vessels were in tact at the top, the reaction rate of clad with the near stagnant steam would have been much lower compared to the total exposure of the fuel / graphite to air (Oxygen) in case of Chernobyl, which was like "free for all" ! Moreover, the I-131 and possibly small quantities of Caesium-137 were mixed completely with steam cloud unlike in Chernobyl, where it was all air. Once the steam cloud condenses, majority of this I-131 and possibly all Caesium-137 would have settled in few KM vicinity only.
Now, everyone knows about all that hype created by the media as if USA, Europe, India, China, everyone on this Planet is going to be affected by the fall out of Fukushima accident ! Today, absolutely there is no media to explain what happened to those “radiation clouds” carrying " so much " of radioactive substances ! They didn’t know, it was a simple water vapour cloud with some I-131.
But the fact remains that due to heavy flooding of the Reactors with Sea Water in unusual manners, there was lot of low level radioactive contaminated water which was discharged into the sea. Some water also directly seeped into the soil through the cracked trenches. However, owing to the very low quantities of radioactive nuclides involved ( primarily due to the fact that not much of fuel was outside the reactor domain), and due to the slow development over several days( Read : I-131 half life is only 8 days), the effect of sea discharge also would have been low only.
Only if there was substantial damage to Reactor No.2 at the bottom, and the fuel pellets / particles were lying loose due to the damaged Zirconium clad, then there is possibility that these pellets / particles could have been carried out of the reactor. But still the possibility of the particles reaching the sea is remote. If it were really “core melt” as confirmed by almost everyone, and not mere damage to the fuel pins due to Zircoalloy clad rupture, then this possibility of loose pellets / particles is also ruled out. The fused / melted / sintered fuel will be in tact at the bottom of the reactor only. It could not have been carried away by the water. This will be known in due course of time.
So, in Fukushima there were no casualties. There were no Iodine effect on children. No major contamination of Air. There was some contamination of soil and sea water in the vicinity only.
Still media talks of end of nuclear energy post Fukushima !
In fact, in my opinion, Fukushima accident is yet another proof after the Hiroshima / Nagasaki Atom bombs and the two major nuclear reactor accidents of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, that there are no such thing as “death of millions” “ with unimaginable long term effects ”, etc as postulated time and again by anti-nuke lobby either due to immediate effect or due to long term effects of radiation released from nuclear accidents.
Moreover, Fukushima accident has confirmed that the Nuclear Reactors can be safely designed, built and operated on any worst seismic zone. There was absolutely no damage to any of the systems / buildings in not only the 6 Reactors of Fukushima, but also in the 11 other nuclear power plants which were located in the east coast of Japan, due to the ground level acceleration caused by the earth quake. It was measured at 8.9 in Rictor scale. This intensity was one of the highest in the recent history and the acceleration was actually 15 times higher than the value for which the reactors have been designed.
It has conclusively been proved that all the three reactors of Fukushima operating at that time responded to the earth quake and instantly shut down with perfect precision, like the other 11 reactors.
It was only the tsunami, the off shoot of the earth quake, which hit the coast after about an hour, played havoc. The reactors had a tsunami protection wall which can protect tsunamis of height 5.7 m. But the actual tsunami height was 14 m ! It cut off the grid power supply, damaged the emergency diesel power supply and above all completely made the reactors inaccessible. This made the plant people completely helpless in the initial few hours.
Despite the best of their efforts, they could not operate the regular emergency core cooling systems in the crucial initial few hours leading to the excessive heating of the reactor core / fuel storage pond leading to the accident, the effect of which was discussed above.
With this experience, definitely, the Nuclear industry will make appropriate design changes and provide back up emergency core cooling systems which are immune to this kind of natural calamities.
A few possible systems could be, 1) Passive air cooling coils through which the primary coolant water / steam will pass through by natural circulation in a closed loop, 2) Buffer water / ice storage which will flow by gravity into the reactor which will last for at least about 10 days under once through mode, if required (with steam vented out continuously), 3) Use of alternate cooling media during emergency which will not react with Zircoalloy even at elevated temperatures( possibly with no Hydrogen content), etc. These are tertiary modes of ECCS proposed, which will come on line by way of opening up of Rupture Discs installed in the Primary Coolant circuit en route to Boiler in PWRs and to Turbines in BWRs, in the event of all other existing modes of ECCS failing and consequent pressure build up in the reactor.
One thing must be clearly understood. In the event of loss of coolant nuclear accident, which is the only possible accident of concern to the public, the steam which is coming out of the core is not that dangerous. The worst possible radioactive nuclides expected when there is fuel clad failure are Iodine -131 and Cesium – 137, the majority being the former. Iodine -131 with 8 days half life is less harmful and it can be treated with little ease. Only Cs-137 is trouble some. But its quantity will be much less. With timely evacuation of people, use of protective mask and intake of Iodine tablets, the effect of these radioactive materials can be minimized.
This is not to simplify the issue. It is to high light the fact that, the much talked about phrases “ radiation is invisible and hence dangerous ”, “ nothing can be done about it ”, “ it is a silent killer ”, “ the scientists have no answer for this ”, “ it travels for thousands of Kilometers ”, “ it is carried by clouds ”, etc are all COMPLETELY FALSE and are borne out of either total ignorance or due to prejudice developed at young ages without knowing what it is – like fear for darkness and ghost.
Now, for a comparison between the Nuclear Energy and its nearest competitor, the Coal based Energy, let us see what are the actual human loss and injuries in both the cases. After all, no energy can be completely safe. It is only the ultimate trade off between how much good and how much bad. We have to see which form of energy gives more benefit with lesser effect on humanity and the environment in the long run.
Coal based Energy and Nuclear Energy in terms of effect on humanity :
During this period between the three nuclear accidents( 1979 to 2011), the nuclear energy has been contributing on an average about 15% of the total world energy requirement. Coal has been contributing about 60% – about 4 times that of nuclear energy. The rest is by all other sources like hydel, geo thermal, wind, solar, etc.
Since nuclear energy with 15% energy contribution had a total human loss of 43 in nuclear energy related accidents, it is but natural that the coal fired thermal power plant related accidents shall not be more than 172 ( 4 x 43). Coal mining which is one of the major contributors for human loss in the entire energy sector had killed much more than this 172. The actual numbers are mind boggling.
The world average of all mine related deaths in the 80s was about 40,000 per year. In the 90s it was about 10,000. Now it is hovering around 8000 per year. So, a very conservative number for the period between 1979 to 2011 for all mining related deaths is about 588,000 ( 40,000 x 10 + 10,000 x 10 + 8000 x 11 ). It is an established fact that more than 75% of this mining related deaths are from coal mine related accidents alone. Hence, the coal mine accident deaths in the period under discussion is at least 441,000 ( 588,000 x 0.75).
What is more, in US alone for which data is available, 678,375 persons have been injured in mining related accidents in this period. Out of this injured, substantial number would have lost their limbs.
Moreover, every one knows that the data collection and media coverage in mining industry, especially coal industry, is not as effective as in nuclear industry. These 588,000 deaths in mining related accidents are based on reported data. The actual numbers would have been much higher, especially due to non disclosure of mining accidents by China.
Further, like in any other industry / technology the initial two nuclear accidents have taken place in the initial 40 years of Nuclear industry while the technology was maturing with the lessons learnt based on experience. If we take the example of coal mining itself, from 1935 to 1975, in 45 years, in US alone 33,145 persons have died and 18,72,255 persons were injured. But now there is substantial improvement.
Please note, the quantity of Uranium mined is almost negligible compared to the quantity of coal mined. For those who need the numbers, one gram of U-235 generates as much electricity as 3 tons of coal can generate. Hence the quantity of cola required to get the same amount of energy that can be obtained from one ton of natural Uranium( with 0.72% U-235 and balance U 238) s 25,000 tons ! This is with the use of Uranium in Thermal Reactors.
If we consider the use of Uranium in Fast Breeder Reactors, where U 238 is totally converted into Plutonium 239 by repeated reprocessing and reuse, the quantity of coal required for each of Uranium mined is 100 times high i.e. 25,00,000 tons of coal ! Moreover, there are no dust problem, Methane related accidents, poisonous gases, etc in Uranium mining. Hence, the deaths related to Uranium mining are not counted for Nuclear Energy related accidents.
As for the 10,000 potential premature deaths expected due to Chernobyl in the years to come, please compare it with the decrease in life expectancy of millions of coal miner’s world wide and their wretched life inside mines. If we take into account of the various other coal based power plant issues like flue gas pollution, fly ash pollution, coal transport pollution, diesel / electricity consumed in coal transport, the deaths associated with the few dozen major boiler explosions every year, routine power plant accidents, etc, the number of deaths would have been at least 50 times that of this 10,000 potential pre-matured deaths !
There is another important factor which is over looked by many. And that is the small quantity of radioactive materials associated with the coal. According to the U.S National Council on Radiation Protection and Monitoring, population exposure from a 1000-MWe power plant amounts to 490 person-Rem / year for coal power plants and 4.8 person-Rem / year for nuclear plants during normal operation, the latter being 136 person-Rem / year for the complete nuclear fuel cycle. This is purely because of the fact that the flue gas and fly ash which carry the radioactive substances present in the coal freely come into public domain. Whereas, it is perfectly contained within the plant boundary in nuclear industry.
http://drrobertbullard.com/blog/item/21-why-epa-s…
http://www.articledashboard.com/Article/Is-Steam-…
Coal based Energy and Nuclear Energy in terms of effect on Environment :
As for the environment, it is clearly the coal which is causing too much damage. There is no second opinion on this matter. It is the single largest reason for the CO2 accumulation and green house effect, leading to the global warming. It is causing enormous air pollution due to the emission of flue gas and dust particles. The disposal of Fly ash is a major issue, despite its use in brick forming. Environmental issues of open cast coal mining and the issues associated with the handling of over burden in the mines are all related to coal power plants. There are several such environmental issues, which have now been taken for granted as inevitable evils of coal based power plants.
Absolutely no such environmental issues in the Nuclear power, except the Uranium mining related issues, which are much less in magnitude compared to coal mining.
Some may argue, what about the radioactive waste disposal issue associated with nuclear energy. Technologies are very much available. It has already been demonstrated at many places. Be rest assured, it is a very simple technology as explained below.
The radioactivity of spent fuel dies down to 1/20 th and 1/1000 th of its original value in 1 year and 25 years respectively after taking out of the reactor. After about 25 years, the spent fuels are reprocessed to recover the balance Uranium and Plutonium which can be reused. For this, the spent fuel is dissolved in nitric acid. Uranium and Plutonium are separated and recovered.
The left out waste solution containing the radioactive fission products is concentrated till it becomes like a glass melt. For a nuclear reactor of 1000MWe capacity, the quantity of this glass melt that will be generated per year will be hardly 500 litres. This glass melt is poured in small canisters and these canisters are embedded in concrete blocks. These concrete blocks are then buried in abandoned deep mines with stable rocks. These blocks are monitored for about 25 years and are forgotten later ! Nothing is left out to worry about since almost all long lived transuranics are removed and most of the high active short lived fission products would have died down in the 50 years period.
The Technology of Nuclear Waste disposal is as simple as that. As long as you don’t know about something, it always looks as if great and impossible. But Nuclear Engineers already know how to handle the nuclear waste and have already demonstrated in many countries, including India.
Still there are a few who will argue, what about the cost of Fuel Reporcessing and Waste Management. The cost of Fuel Reporcessing is more than repaid by the value of U-238 and Pu-239 recovered and reused as fuel. The cost of Waste disposal will be about 10% of the nuclear energy cost per unit.
Why the media is against the Nuclear Energy ?
When everything is fine with Nuclear energy, then why is it that so much of noise is made against Nuclear energy through out the world by most media ? Why there is general perception against Nuclear energy among the general public ? There is some back ground information for this.
Nuclear energy was born with the Defence tag. It always grew in association with the atom bombs. So, there was always a veil of secrecy surrounding the Nuclear reactors. No media was allowed free access to any nuclear establishments, including those reactors which were purely for power generation.
Naturally this created a sense of inquisitiveness among the media and they started writing exaggerated stories based on half baked information provided by lower rung people in the Nuclear industry. Due to the secrecy code followed by the Nuclear industry throughout the world, no one from the Nuclear industry could officially deny these media reports and provide the correct information. They kept mum. This created enough room for suspicion among the general public.
The miscommunication to the media during the Three Mile Island accident, which was the first major nuclear accident to happen, reinforced this mistrust. Since it happened in USA, this mistrust among the people spread easily to the rest of the world, like a wild fire.
Now, of late with the importance of Atom bomb being pushed aside, the Nuclear industry is ready to provide all information. Unfortunately, since the general public had developed prejudice against nuclear industry during this period of silence, they are not ready to listen to the nuclear industry and believe the real facts ! They continue to listen to the exaggerations and false data given by the media. This is only natural psychology !
Also, there is something called “ perceived risk ” in cases where the risks are associated with non visible aspects, like current / ghost / darkness. Radiation is one such thing. Once some opinion has gone into the minds of people about this perceived risk, any amount of scientific data, logical reasoning and rational explanations is going to be of use.
The only way is to bulldoze these opinions and go for actions ignoring them. They will realize their folly later. If we listen to their voices now just because they are the majority, it is going to be a loss for everybody, not only for the scientists ! It is a bitter pill. It has to be swallowed by the decision makers. Otherwise they will be at fault. At some point in the history they will be questioned by these very same media and the public as to why didn’t were they over ruled – after all, we don’t know all these as they are too technical !
After all no farmer accepted Ponni rice or IR 20 or Urea or Bangalore Tomato or Dr.Norman Borlaug’s dwarf wheat / rice when these were originally introduced in the 60s ! Government had to do cajoling, advertisement, special benefits, even indirect threats in some cases, to make them accept. Any development, any technology had to go through this phase. This is history. More so, in the case of Nuclear energy due to the reasons explained above.
What about Non-Conventional Energy Sources ?
Whenever energy options are discussed, there are some people, who are mostly non-engineers, come up with the option of Non-Conventional energy sources. They do not understand what is the quantum of electrical energy we are talking about, what is the total potential of these Non-Conventional Energy Sources, what is the Plant Load Factors of these sources and what kind of environmental disturbances are in store in future due to these power sources, etc.
They will argue as if these sources are some new inventions and the engineers / scientists have special aversions towards these sources ! Just because they understand at least something about these sources, unlike nuclear energy, they support these sources. The three sources which are often brought up for discussion are : Solar, Wind and Bio mass. Let us analyze the details of these power sources.
The Solar Photo Voltaic power is so expensive that TNREDC has recently fixed the purchase price of one unit of electricity from PV Cells based power plants at Rs.18.45 for the next 25 years ! This much price is purely because of the fact that the Silicon used in the PV Cells has to be 99.9999 % pure ( it is 99.9999999 % for Computer chips !). To achieve this purity, we need to spend so much energy that it takes 5 years for the PV Cells to get back that energy ! It is always difficult to purify solids rather than liquids / gases. It needs very high energy.
Also, you need 12 acres of land for each MW of installed capacity for PV Cells. Since PV Cells can produce electricity only for about 8 hours a day and about 300 days in a year, the PLF is hardly 20 to 25%, as against 75 to 90 % for Coal / Nuclear plants. Hence, we need to install 3 MW of PV Cells to get as much energy as we can get from 1 MW of Coal / Nuclear power plant. Which means, we need 36 acres of land to get as much energy as we get from 1 MW of Coal / Nuclear power plant.
Still any one wants to bat for Solar energy as a viable alternate for Coal / Nuclear power ?
As for the Wind Energy, no doubt it is clean and reasonably cheap. But, are we sure that there will be no climate changes due to Wind Mills ? After all, monsoons are associated with the atmospheric disturbances and unequal flow of wind in certain periods, in certain specific places and in certain specific directions. Now, with the large scale deployment of wind mills in high wind regions, are we not slowing down and altering these natural disturbances? Will it not affect the climate one day or the other, if not today ?
Regarding Bio-mass, no one seems to have really understood about one fundamental issue. If we burn the biomass year after year and if we do not recycle it back into the soil, how will the soil regain its organic content ? How will the minerals taken by the plants from the soil get replenished ? How will the soil maintain its life ? Already about 13 million tons of organic matter which are brought to the urban centres of India every day, are not recycled back to the villages. This is resulting in continuous depletion of Soil Organic Carbon ( SOC ).
If we encourage bio mass power plants, especially those based on the agricultural residues like straw, husk, leaves, shells, etc, it will only add fuel to the fire. The only exception can be bagasse, and that also, only the surplus left out after allocating for paper plant shall be burnt for power.
So, the worst that anyone can do to damage our Planet is to set up bio mass based power plants to get a few thousand MW of power, which is a pea nut in our total energy requirement.
Even if we accept all these three (Solar, Wind, Bio mass) as viable alternates, what are the quantum that we can get from all these three sources in India ? The total potential itself is hardly about 60,000 MW, which is about 15% of our installed capacity requirement 10 years down the line. Considering the Plant Load Factor of 15 to 25% for these power sources, it hardly comes to 2 to 4% in terms of energy generated.
Ten years down the line, we need atleast 4,00,000 MW of installed capacity as against the current level of 1,74,000 MW. Even if we assume that somehow ( how ?) we get all the funds required for installing the 60,000 MW of Non-Conventional energy Sources on priority ( Rs.9,00,000 crores ), where do we go for the rest of the required installed capacity of 2,11,000 MW ( 4,00,000-1,74,000-60,000/4 ) ?
The choices left out are Hydel / Coal / Nuclear. With hydel potential pegged at about 20,000 MW, the balance of 1,91,000 MW has to come from Coal and Nuclear.
Now, since we are aware of the advantages of Nuclear energy over Coal, we shall set at least equal target for both Coal and Nuclear, if not higher for Nuclear.
It is only the money and the people’s choice – not fuel ( thanks to Indo-US Deal), not technology, not manufacturing capacity, not Fuel Enrichment, not Reprocessing – which are in the way of Nuclear energy targets. If we permit France / Russia / US / Korea to set up Nuclear power plants, they are ready to bring in part of the investment in the form of capital goods. Rest of the investment, we can manage.
Earlier when the Indo-US Nuclear Deal was under discussion, some people were crying foul that the foreigners want to dump the old age nuclear technology on India. Now they are making noise in Jaitapur saying that latest technology is brought to India by the French company ! Obviously, these objections are totally sentimental and perceived risk based and not sensible enough to be considered seriously.
It is time that the people got rid of their mistrust towards the scientists and go for Nuclear power to save the environment from the ever increasing Carbon Dioxide effect and coal mining deaths.
So, all educated people like you, please think before accepting any adverse media report on Nuclear Energy. It is not at all bad as is portrayed to be time and again. The 2 million engineers, workers and their families who live hale and healthy very close to the 442 nuclear reactors operating throughout the world producing 3,75,000 MW of power is a testimony to the safety of nuclear power plants. Are they ignorant people ? Won’t they get much better jobs else where given their highest level of qualifications ?
Do you think a News paper Reporter holding a BA Literature or BA History Degree knows and cares more than a Nuclear Engineer (who lives with his children closest to the Reactor than anyone else) about the well being of his family and the public ?
I fervently appeal to all the readers of this Article to accept and spread the message, Fission based Nuclear Energy is the right choice for the next 40 years. By that time the Engineers / Scientists will find a suitable material which will have Super Conductivity near room temperature and hence we will have commercially viable Fusion based Nuclear Energy. Once Fusion reactors evolve commercially, fusion energy will be the clean and ultimate source of energy for ever.
K. PERIASAMY, M.Tech(Chem Engg)
Dear Dr. Periasamy,
Thanks a lot for participating in the discussions.
Just to clarify: we did publish your previous comment, but due to some server error, we had to restore the back-up which was 3-4 days old and in the process we lost a few articles published in between and also some comments of the period, including yours.
At DiaNuke.org, we do not believe in any kind of censorship on ideas. A free, open-minded and healthy dialogue is necessary when we are dealing with such crucial issues.
You are requested to re-enter your previous comment if you have saved it. Please accept our apologies for the unintended technical glitch.
With warm regards
Thank you very much for the clarification.
In my earlier post, which I also did not save, I had essentially highlighted the following :
There are three types of people who oppose the Kudankulam reactors.
1. Those who are displaced by the project and who have not been adequately compensated due to the existing archaic compensation packages.
– They need to be compensated adequately.
2. The fishermen who have apprehensions about,
a) The fishing rights in that area.
b) The possibility of radiation getting into the fish
c) The possibility of reduction in fish growth due to the rise in temperature of sea water locally
– All these are pure propaganda made by some of the people who have real apprehensions about the safety of nuclear power and they need the support of these fishermen to make their agitation stronger.
- Regarding the fishing rights, there is absolutely no doubt that there is no restriction for them.
- Regarding the radiation, this is totally a myth that radiation is being let into the sea ! Please note, the radiation is associated with the fuel and it is always intact within the reactors.
- Regarding the temperature rise, it is a common thing in any power plant which is set up on the coast, be it coal fired or nuclear. There are hundreds of power plants like this set up on the coast and all of them let out hot water at about 5 to 8"C higher than the ambient temperature. This temperature rise is very local and it gets normalised within few hundred meters. It will not have any impact on the growth of fish or any other marine life.
So, the fishermen need to have no apprehensions whatsoever with regard to their fishing rights or the radiation getting into the fish.
3. The so called intellectuals who genuinely feel that nuclear power is unsafe and bad.
– These people have developed some sort of an aversion to nuclear power due to various reasons like, it is associated with atom bomb, it has been always projected in bad light by the media due to a complex reason (which needs a lengthy explanation !) and above all, the "fear of unknown".
- All these are purely "perceived risks". It is like fear for ghost, fear for darkness, fear for height, fear for water, etc. No amount of convincing and rational explanations are going to be of use. After listening to the whole explanation, they will come back to the same question, "if that happens" " if this happens" what will you do ? We would have given explanation for everything. Being too technical and complex, only to some level they can understand. Beyond that point they can not understand the technicalities.
It is difficult for even engineers who have not studied nuclear engineering or worked in nuclear power to comprehend the overall nuclear energy issues.
At this point, they will stop listening and obviously nothing goes into their mind. Naturally, they go back to their own perception and it becomes a dead lock. It is something similar to the argument about ghost or god.
These people being genuine / influential people and who are in touch with the general public, they are able to effectively convey their perception based fears to the general public.
These type of people are there throughout the world and through out the history. Nothing unusual about it in this case.
Please note, spreading fear or danger perception is much easier than allaying the fear or danger ! That too, whom soever speaks first to the public, their view prevails. It is difficult to erase the first impression.
In such situation, what the Govt can do ? They have no choice but to ignore those intellectuals and go ahead with the developments. Some day, the public will realise that what the Govt did was in their own interest only. After all what the Govt is going to gain by killing any one !
If everyone starts objecting to everything based on perceived risk, without any justification, nothing can be done. Mettur people can say we do not want dam, since it will flood them if it is hit by terrorist bombs. Tuticorin thermal power plant people can say, we do not want coal powered power plants since it pollutes them. Likewise everyone can come out with some plausible reasons for objecting anything and everything.
Please appreciate the point that the engineers and scientists know more than these intellectuals and these engineers and scientists are going to work and live close to the plant along with their families.
As general public, we have objected to many development initiatives of the Govts in the past. We have objected to the Ponni rice, we have objected to urea, we have objected to small pox vaccines, we have objected to grinding machines, we have objected to broiler chickens, etc. It is all due to our ignorance and limited knowledge.
Please understand, every activity on this planet has some risk and some benefit. The educated and knowledgeable experts in the relevant field know the thresh hold limits of the balance between these two. They are correct on almost all instances. That is history. That is how, the population has grown and the standard of living of the masses has improved over the years.
By citing few exceptions, if we do not want to listen to the experts, then we are the losers and not the scientists / engineers or the Govt !
You will find a detailed Article on the comparison of various power options and the effect of the three major nuclear accidents in another post.
K.Periasamy
any afaction in this nuclear power plant give the answer my question
I think you portrait the things little differently.
1: Out of 134 people you agreed 28 people were dead because of radiation. And in out of 106 person 19 people died because of normal cause. Can you take any random 106 person of same age group and count the people died. Those 19 people were dead because they spoiled their body for the exposed radiation…
2. child mortality at Chernobyl: your data is wrong it is 985,000 premature deaths. check Wikipedia.
every where scientists are assuring that nothing will go wrong. Even in Chernobyl. after the accidents they don't hesitate to say that this went wrong. Can you assure that such think cannot happen
Okay after the reactor expires how will you protect.
I think in one of the argument you said. Fishermen will be allowed to fish. If they put 3 stage protection to that where will they fish. What will be the area of fishing.
Kanniyakumari, Thirunelveli, Tutocorin contributes 2000 crores of foreign exchange due to fishing. How can they export it. If the foreign countries doesn't believe there is no radiation.
Why the engineers at Kalpakkam not consuming fish from kalpakkam?
How do you protect the reactors on war time?
What will you do for power after it expires?
Why the government didn't concentrate on 0.001% on Geo-thermal power and tidal power. Geo-thermal has enormous potential.
Why do the government not ready to renew the national power grid. If so we could connect our renewable energy to that and for the rest we can use other alternatives.
Why the windmills are not run even at high wind time and power demand is there? Is it because of the lesser substations are it is to cheat the people as we require more power.
Please verify your data with this "According to the U.S. Department of Energy the immediate effects of the blast killed approximately 70,000 people in Hiroshima.[44] Estimates of total deaths by the end of 1945 from burns, radiation and related disease, the effects of which were aggravated by lack of medical resources, range from 90,000 to 166,000.[1][45] Some estimates state up to 200,000 had died by 1950, due to cancer and other long-term effects.[3][6][46] Another study states that from 1950 to 2000, 46% of leukemia deaths and 11% of solid cancer deaths among bomb survivors were due to radiation from the bombs, the statistical excess being estimated to 94 leukemia and 848 solid cancers.[47] At least eleven known prisoners of war died from the bombing.[48]"-Wikipedia.
You are only talking about cancer and other stuffs. What about permanent gene damage. Some times gene change can be viewed after generations.
Why do we need nuclear plant while other options are there.
1. As on date, apart from those 28, another 19 have died and their death was not due to cancer. It was just normal death due to aging. Death was not premature or due to any specific illness / disease. What is the confusion here ?
2. Firstly, which wikipedia Link ? Please inform. Secondly, you know Wikipedia can be written / edited by anyone ? You and me can just like that edit anything. It is just for some reference. It can not be authentic.
3. If the reactor life is over (expires), the fuel, which only is radioactive will be taken out. The other metal parts including reactor vessel, which if they have picked up some minor radioactivity due to clad rupture anytime during operation will be cut and decontaminated and then disposed like any non radioactive materials. Rest all materials like turbine, generator, etc, including the non primary circuit materials inside the reactor building can be reused like in any other industry.
4. Regarding the Fishermen exclusion Zone, please get correct picture from the local authorities including your local police station.
I may not be able to give the right numbers.
But one thing I can promise you, the fish yield or fish catch will not be affected by the hot water discharge or due to the few KM of exclusion zone.
5.The reactors are built to withstand Missile strikes or Plane crash.
6.We can always build another new reactor. We have enough Thorium in India. That is why we are repeatedly insisting on Nuclear. The problem of expiry ( total consumption) is for coal / oil / gas.
7. Where do you see hot water / steam coming out from earth ? Surely we can ask Govt to set up geothermal power plant. If you are talking about the temp difference between top surface and deep water in sea, it is not economically viable. If you have any data please share with us.
8.Regarding Hiroshima / Nagasaki, there is a misunderstanding. The number quoted by you is all direct casualties of bomb explosion / instant direct radiation exposure at the time of Bomb. This is not applicable for the long term radiation effect of residual fission products which we are discussing. We need to understand the difference between a Bomb and the reactor. In fact, this is one of the important misconceptions people have.
9. Initially there were some difficulties in power transmission from wind mills in certain regions. It is all sorted out. There are no issues with national grid. If anything specific, please explain.
10. Regarding genetic effect, the three possible locations are Hiroshima
Nagasaki. Detailed surveys have been conducted and absolutely there is no evidence for genetic mutations of any cells.
It is only a perception based fear. It has been conclusively proved beyond doubt by various studies.
K.Periasamy
As a developing nation we need energy to support our future industrial & domestic needs. But the way to generate this energy does not depends solely on nuclear energy. Throughout the world many developed countries are shutting down their nuclear reactors and starts looking into alternative ways to produce energy in a safer and greener way. India can achieve its future needs but it will not be the safe for the country's internal security and safety.
Some say why we have to care about 20,000 people when it tales care of 20 lakh peoples energy needs. This is not just about this 20,000 people this is about the future generation of this state and this country.
This fish resources found in this particular place is exported allover Tamil Nadu and to its neighboring states. When this resources gets contaminated it will effect the entire state and the future generation's.
Everyone seems to point developed countries like Germany and Switzerland moving away from nuclear energy as a reason to why we should not do so….There are obvious problems in comparing India with these countries. Firstly, they are developed and they have the capability of developing wind and solar energy at a higher cost. An impoverished country like ours do not have enough resources. Also our needs are growing enormously and our porduction do not cope up with the demand. The power needs of developed countries have reached a stable position and they can now look towards more sustainable forms such as wind and solar. We cannot compare us with them.
In addition to this we already have a Kalpakkam power plant which has been going smoothly. People are living in and around the area and their life is quite normal. As Dr.Periasamy has said, we should not curtail development just because we have some percived threats.
All the thirteen reasons for opposing Nuclear power plant at Kudankulam have been addressed in the follwoing Link, which most of you would have read.
http://www.nuclearfriendsfoundation.com/pdf/Facts…
But, please note, it is curt and upto the point like in any other official responses. You can always get more information in the relevant links, if you browse thro the net or if you approach any of the concerned officials they will provide. Keeping away from the right information sources and blaming the authorities is old practice.
The following Link provides the Countrywise Nuclear Energy Percentage in the total energy usage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_cou…
If we look at the GDP and their Life Expectancy, there is a clear pattern emerging. Please look at the following Link for the relationship between GDP and Life expectancy.
http://www.gapminder.org/downloads/gapminder-worl…
You will notice that, invariably all those countries with substantial energy derived from Nuclear power, have higher GDP and proportionately their Life expectancy is also higher.
If there is any effect due to radiation from nuclear power, atleast the smaller countries like Japan( 29 %, 83 years), South Korea( 31 %, 79 ), UK ( 18%, 79), France ( 75 %, 82 ), Germany ( 26 %, 80 ), Ukraine ( 49%, 69), Belgium ( 52 %, 80) should have seen some health effect on radiation and surely that should have been seen by now since they have nuclear power for several decades.
But these countries have substantially higher Life expectancy and standard of living, obviously derived from a cheaper and cleaner energy source ! .
Now, finally the argument against Nuclear Power narrows down to Nuclear accidents only.
Please go through my Article posted earlier which gives a detailed analysis of the effects of the three nuclear accidents that have happened in the entire history of Nuclear power so far.
Compare it with the effect of Coal mine related accidents and other climate issues associated with it.
Decide for yourself, whether you want to go with media hyped noise against Nuclear Power or with sane feeble voices like ours.
Many people quote Germany and Italy for having decided to with draw from nuclear energy. They do not tell you that there are atleast another 30 countries which are actively pursuing nuclear power. Moreover, Germany and Italy buy the Nuclear power from the adjacent country, France ! What a great wisdom these countries have !
Please note, the decision of any of the Govt to go against nuclear power is taken purely on political basis. Not on any sensible technical analysis by any of the scientists / engineers.
Germany is a typical example. Just because, the ruling party was defeated by the Green Party in the local body elections, the ruling party decided to forego nuclear energy. In fact, just few years back, the same ruling party had changed the earlier Govt decision to close all the nuclear plants and had decided to extend the license of all the running reactors for another 12 years !
If we are to decide this kind of highly technical and complex matters based on pure politics, India will continue to be a poor country for ever !
Already Sethu Canal is caught in the political cob web. Now, Kudankulam is joining it.
Southern district people are supposed to be well educated. At the same time they are known for their limitation of deciding things based on momentary emotional responses. It is also known that they realize it immediately and repent later for having done a mistake ! This is because, fundamentally they are open minded. Anything comes in first, they react immediately !
I request the Southern district people not to fall prey to such emotional responses. Ask your educated engineers, who know the subject more than any one else whom you are listening to today. Ask knowledgeable people like Dr.Kalam.
If you do not believe any of the scientists, you can always go to Kalpakkam and ask people living there.
The young generation of today will squarely put the blame on you for having taken a wrong decision, by being a frog in the well and listening to a tortoise living in the same well !
Please note, just because the tortoise is big and different than the frog, it has no chance to know the rest of the world ! However genuine the tortoise may be in helping you, it has no capacity, since it is also living in the same well with you !
You need to come out of the well. That is the only way. Or else, please listen to those who are out of the well.
It is true for most of the anti-nuke people through out the world.
They have developed certain prejudice based on perceived risks associated with the atom bomb and it is continuously fueled by the media and kept alive.
Otherwise, the media would have simply ignored the Fukusjima accident since not a single person has died in the accident. They made such a hue and cry saying that the cloud coming out of the power plant can damage every other country, including India ! How absurd it was ! Did any of the TV explained what happened later ? There are many such instances where the media is creating hypes and making people to decide based on emotions rather than with calm mind.
Hence, I once again appeal to the readers of this Mail to completely ascertain the facts and figures before listening to anyone, including my views given above.
1. If tsunami water level reaches 7.5 m, how many villages along the coastal India will survive ?
2. Why Govt is not increasing the power generation by Solar even though the solar energy is free ?
3. What is Germany's total nuclear installed capacity ? When are they going to phase out nuclear power ? If nuclear power is unsafe, why are they not closing the plants today ?
4. In the past 3 years, Germany has changed the nuclear policy 3 times. Are you aware of it ? If we copy Germany and change our nuclear policy today, and tomorrow if Germany changes its policy once again, will you not question the scientists later ?
5. What is the population growth rate of Germany / What is the population growth rate of India ?
6. What is the per capita energy consumption of Germany ? what is the per capita energy consumption of India ?
7. How many tons of pollutants are let into atmosphere by the Coal fired power stations of Tuticorin which feed electricity to Kudankulam ? How many people are affected by this pollutants?
8. How many coal fired power stations are going to be idle in the next few years for want of coal linkage ?
9. For how many years, the gas from India's largest gas well ( Relience KG Basin) is going to be available at the current production level ?
10. What is the effect of slowing down of the wind by the wind mills installed in the Western ghats at selective locations where the velocities are high ? How many of you knew about the long term effects of CO2 emission 30 years back ?
Mr.Periyasamy,
I am sure you belong to the scientific community, the fact of the matter remains that there can be no middle path with suspicious approach. Scientists feel that the people behind the agitators have a hidden agenda, and the agitators feel that scientists just don't care. Is this the way any project is implemented.Are these folks who are agitating not stake holders at least for the reason that they are the people who will bear the brunt if anything untoward happens. Don't they deserve a patient hearing and convincing. even in this article you have given a lot of points. I would sincerely request you to answer the 13 questions each one by one. This is not a test of intelligence, this is a test of character. They say even ceaser's wife should be above suspicion.If you believe in what you say, I only request to consider a point by point rebuttal to the 13Qs. If you feel they / you do not have an answer, fine, if you feel they don't deserve an answer you know where you stand.
No body can hide the truth from the people for a long time.This holds good for the scientists and the people behind the protesters.
Koodamkulam can wipe out you ……..
Fight aganist ….Kudamkulam…
I liked you blog. However I have some reservations about the anti-nuclear activists like the group you represent or for that matter Medha patkar. India needs to develop and energy is the sine qua non for development. Is there any alternative to nuclear energy. Renewable sources lie green energy are just too expensive. You need to reflect on this as well.
Nuclear Plant Construction
Most reactors currently planned are in the Asian region, with fast-growing economies and rapidly-rising electricity demand.
Many countries with existing nuclear power programs (Argentina, Armenia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czech Rep., France, India, Japan, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Korea, South Africa, Ukraine, UK, USA) have plans to build new power reactors (beyond those now under construction).
In all, over 150 power reactors with a total net capacity of some 172,000 MWe are planned and over 340 more are proposed. Rising gas prices and greenhouse constraints on coal, coupled with energy security concerns, have combined to put nuclear power back on the agenda for projected new capacity in many countries.
In the USA there are proposals for over twenty new reactors and 12 combined construction and operating licence applications for these are under review. All are for late third-generation plants, and a further proposal is for two ABWR units. it is expected that some of the new reactors will be on line by 2020.
In Canada there are plans to build up to 2200 MWe or more of new capacity in Ontario, and proposals for similar capacity in Alberta and one large reactor in New Brunswick.
In Finland, construction is now under way on a fifth, very large reactor which will come on line in 2012, and plans are firming for another large one to follow it.
France is building a similar 1600 MWe unit at Flamanville, for operation from 2012, and a second is to follow it at Penly.
In the UK, four similar 1600 MWe units are planned for operation by 2019, and a further 6000 MWe is proposed.
Romania's second power reactor istarted up in 2007, and plans are being implemented for two further Canadian units to operate by 2017.
Slovakia is completing two 470 MWe units at Mochovce, to operate from 2011-12.
Bulgaria is planning to start building two 1000 MWe Russian reactors at Belene.
In Russia, ten reactors are under active construction, one being a large fast neutron reactor. About 14 further reactors are then planned, some to to replace existing plants, and by 2016 ten new reactors totalling at least 9.8 GWe should be operating. Further reactors are planned to add new capacity by 2020. This will increase the country's present 21.7 GWe nuclear power capacity to 43 GWe about 2020. In addition about 5 GW of nuclear thermal capacity is planned. A small floating power plant is expected to be completed by 2012 and others are planned to follow.
Poland is planning some6000 MWe of nuclear power capacity, and may also join a project in Lithuania, with Estonia and Latvia.
South Korea plans to bring a further seven reactors into operation by 2016, giving total new capacity of 9200 MWe. Of the first five, now under construction, three are improved OPR-1000 designs. Then come Shin-Kori-3 & 4 and after them Shin-Ulchin 1&2, the first of the Advanced PWRs of 1400 MWe, to be in operation by 2016. These APR-1400 designs have evolved from a US design which has US NRC design certification, and have been known as the Korean Next-Generation Reactor. Four further APR-1400 units are planned, and the design has been sold to the UAE (see below).
Japan has two reactors under construction but another three which were likely to start building by mid 2011 have been deferred. It also has plans for a further nine power reactors, totalling over 13,000 MWe which are expected to come on line by 2022 but are now uncertain.
In China, now with 14 operating reactors on the mainland, the country is well into the next phase of its nuclear power program. Some 26 reactors are under construction and many more are likely to be so in 2012. Those under construction include the world's first Westinghouse AP1000 units, and a demonstration high-temperature gas-cooled reactor plant is due to start construction. Many more units are planned, with construction due to start within three years. But most capacity under construction will be the largely indigenous CPR-1000. China aims at least to quadruple its nuclear capacity from that operating and under construction by 2020.
On Taiwan, Taipower is building two advanced reactors (ABWR) at Lungmen.
India has 20 reactors in operation, and four under construction (two expected to be completed in 2011). This includes two large Russian reactors and a large prototype fast breeder reactor as part of its strategy to develop a fuel cycle which can utilise thorium. Twenty further units are planned. 17 further units are planned, and proposals for more – including western and Russian designs – are taking shape following the lifting of trade restrictions.
Pakistan has a third 300 MWe reactor under construction at Chashma, financed by China. There are plans for more Chinese power reactors.
In Kazakhstan, a joint venture with Russia's Atomstroyexport envisages development and marketing of innovative small and medium-sized reactors, starting with a 300 MWe Russian design as baseline for Kazakh units.
In Iran nuclear power plant construction was suspended in 1979 but in 1995 Iran signed an agreement with Russia to complete a 1000 MWe PWR at Bushehr. This started up in 2011 but is not yet grid connected (in mid August)
.
The United Arab Emirates has awarded a $20.4 billion contract to a South Korean consortium to build four 1400 MWe reactors by 2020.
Jordan has committed plans for its first reactor to be operating by 2020, and is developing its legal and regulatory infrastructure.
Turkey has contracts signed for four 1200 MWe Russian nuclear reactors at one site and is negotiating similar capacity at another. Its legal and regulatory infrastructure is well-developed.
Vietnam has committed plans for its first reactors at two sites (2×2000 MWe), to be operating by 2020, and is developing its legal and regulatory infrastructure. The first plant will be a turnkey project built by Atomstroyexport. The second will be Japanese.
Indonesia plans to construct 6000 MWe of nuclear power capacity by 2025.
Thailand plans to start constructing an initial nuclear power station in 2014.
Fuller details of all the above contries curently without nuclear power are in country papers or the paper on Emerging Nuclear Energy Countries.
Plant Life Extension and Retirements
Most nuclear power plants originally had a nominal design lifetime of 25 to 40 years, but engineering assessments of many plants have established that many can operate longer. In the USA over 60 reactors have been granted licence renewals which extend their operating lives from the original 40 out to 60 years, and operators of most others are expected to apply for similar extensions. Such licence extensions at about the 30-year mark justify significant capital expenditure for replacement of worn equipment and outdated control systems.
In France, there are rolling ten-year reviews of reactors. In 2009 the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) approved EdF's safety case for 40-year operation of the 900 MWe units, based on generic assessment of the 34 reactors.
When some of the first commercial nuclear power stations in the world, Calder Hall and Chapelcross in the UK, were built in the 1950s they were very conservatively engineered, though it was assumed that they would have a useful lifetime of only 20-25 years. They were then authorised to operate for 50 years, but due to economic factors closed earlier. Most other Magnox plants are licensed for 40-year lifetimes, and one will run for 45 years.
The Russian government is extending the operating lives of most of the country's reactors from their original 30 years, for 15 years, or for 25 years in the case of the newer VVER-1000 units, with significant upgrades.
The technical and economic feasibility of replacing major reactor components, such as steam generators in PWRs, and pressure tubes in CANDU heavy water reactors, has been demonstrated. The possibilities of component replacement and licence renewals extending the lifetimes of existing plants are very attractive to utilities, especially in view of the public acceptance difficulties involved in constructing replacement nuclear capacity.
On the other hand, economic, regulatory and political considerations have led to the premature closure of some power reactors, particularly in the United States, where reactor numbers have fell from 110 to 104, and in eastern Europe.
It should not be assumed that reactors will close when their licence is due to expire, since licence renewal is now common. However, new plants coming on line are balanced by old plants being retired. Over 1996-2010, 43 reactors were retired as 54 started operation. There are no firm projections for retirements over the next two decades, but WNA estimates that at least 60 of those now operating will close by 2030, most being small plants. The 2009 WNA Market Report reference case has 143 reactors closing by 2030, using very conservative assumptions about licence renewal.
The World Nuclear Power Reactor table gives a fuller and (for current year) possibly more up to date overview of world reactor status.
Power reactors under construction, or almost so
Start Operation* REACTOR TYPE MWe (net)
2011 India, NPCIL Kaiga 4 PHWR 202
2011 Iran, AEOI Bushehr 1 PWR 950
2011 India, NPCIL Kudankulam 1 PWR 950
2011 Canada, Bruce Pwr Bruce A1 PHWR 769
2011 Russia, Energoatom Kalinin 4 PWR 950
2011 Korea, KHNP Shin Kori 2 PWR 1000
2012 Argentina, CNEA Atucha 2 PHWR 692
2012 Canada, Bruce Pwr Bruce A2 PHWR 769
2012 India, Bhavini Kalpakkam FBR 470
2012 Finland, TVO Olkilouto 3 PWR 1600
2012 India, NPCIL Kudankulam 2 PWR 950
2012 Taiwan Power Lungmen 1 ABWR 1300
2012 Taiwan Power Lungmen 2 ABWR 1300
2012 Korea, KHNP Shin Wolsong 1 PWR 1000
2012 Canada, NB Power Point Lepreau 1 PHWR 635
2012 Russia, Energoatom Vilyuchinsk PWR x 2 70
2012 Russia, Energoatom Novovoronezh II-1 PWR 1070
2012 China, CNNC Qinshan phase II-4 PWR 650
2012 China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 1 PWR 1080
2012 China, CGNPC Ningde 1 PWR 1080
2012? Japan, Chugoku Shimane 3 ABWR 1375
2013 Slovakia, SE Mochovce 3 PWR 440
2013 Korea, KHNP Shin Wolsong 2 PW R 1000
2013 USA, TVA Watts Bar 2 PWR 1180
2013 Russia, Energoatom Leningrad II-1 PWR 1070
2013 Korea, KHNP Shin-Kori 3 PWR 1350
2013 China, CNNC Sanmen 1 PWR 1250
2013 China, CGNPC Ningde 2 PWR 1080
2013 China, CGNPC Yangjiang 1 PWR 1080
2013 China, CGNPC Taishan 1 PWR 1700
2013 China, CNNC Fangjiashan 1 PWR 1080
2013 China, CNNC Fuqing 1 PWR 1080
2013 China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 2 PWR 1080
2013 Slovakia, SE Mochovce 4 PWR 440
2014 China, CNNC Sanmen 2 PWR 1250
2014 China, CPI Haiyang 1 PWR 1250
2014 China, CGNPC Ningde 3 PWR 1080
2014 China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 3 PWR 1080
2014 China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 4 PWR 1080
2015 China, CGNPC Yangjiang 2 PWR 1080
2014 China, CGNPC Taishan 2 PWR 1700
2014 China, CNNC Fangjiashan 2 PWR 1080
2014 China, CNNC Fuqing 2 PWR 1080
2014 China, CNNC Changjiang 1 PWR 650
2014 Korea, KHNP Shin-Kori 4 PWR 1350
2014? Japan, EPDC/J Power Ohma ABWR 1350
2014 Russia, Energoatom Rostov 3 PWR 1070
2014 Russia, Energoatom Beloyarsk 4 FNR 750
2015 China, CGNPC Yangjiang 3 PWR 1080
2015 China, CPI Haiyang 2 PWR 1250
2015 China, CGNPC Ningde 4 PWR 1080
2015 China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 5 PWR 1080
2015 China, CGNPC Fangchenggang 1 PWR 1080
2015 China, CNNC Changjiang 2 PWR 650
2015 China, CNNC Hongshiding 1 PWR 1080
2015 China, CNNC Taohuajiang 1 PWR 1250
2015 China, CNNC Fuqing 3 PWR 1080
2015 China, China Huaneng Shidaowan HTR 200
2015 India, NPCIL Kakrapar 3 PHWR 640
2016 France, EdF Flamanville 3 PWR 1600
2016 Korea, KHNP Shin-Ulchin 1 PWR 1350
2016 Romania, SNN Cernavoda 3 PHWR 655
2016 Russia, Energoatom Novovoronezh II-2 PWR 1070
2016 Russia, Energoatom Leningrad II-2 PWR 1200
2016 Russia, Energoatom Rostov 4 PWR 1200
2016 Russia, Energoatom Baltic 1 PWR 1200
2016 Ukraine, Energoatom Khmelnitsky 3 PWR 1000
2016 India, NPCIL Kakrapar 4 PHWR 640
2016 India, NPCIL Rajasthan 7 PHWR 640
2016 China, CGNPC Yangjiang 4 PWR 1080
2016 Pakistan, PAEC Chashma 3 PWR 300
2016 China, several
2017 Russia, Energoatom Leningrad II-3 PWR 1200
2017 Ukraine, Energoatom Khmelnitsky 4 PWR 1000
2017 India, NPCIL Rajasthan 8 PHWR 640
2017 Korea, KHNP Shin-Ulchin 2 PWR 1350
2017 Pakistan, PAEC Chashma 4 PWR 300
2017 Romania, SNN Cernavoda 4 PHWR 655
2017 Bulgaria, NEK Belene 1 PWR 1000
2017 Japan, JAPC Tsuruga 3 APWR 1538
2017 China, several
* Latest announced year of proposed commercial operation. Rostov = Volgodonsk
Sources:
WNA information papers
Almost every person who understands the complete energy scenerio of the world – India in particular – is able to appreciate the need for Nuclear Power, apart from other sources, be it Coal or Solar or Wind, given the limitations and problems of each source.
But the only issue is about the safety, which has become a "perceived matter" which is looked at by a reasonable percentage of people, including the media, from the heart, rather than from the mind.
Many people ask these simple questions – If nothing is there to hide, why we should not be allowed to see the plant ? If nothing is dangerous, why you are conducting mock up evacuation drills ?
These two issues are very genuine and they need to be addressed, however trivial it may be, from the stand point of the Scientists / Engineers.
For the first one, KNPP authorities shall take the general public, including the agitating leaders through out the plant. Since the fuel is not loaded, almost all areas are accessible now.
Also all the Journalists must be shown the complete plant. It is not enough if we have shown to the Journalists a few years ago. Now, new people, young people with almost negative perspective on nuclear energy ( thanks to the several decades of secrecy kept by the nuclear industry, for genuine reasons known to scientists ) have come to the media. They will not believe unless they see and get convinced by themselves.
Most of the Journalists being non-engineers, they have difficulty in comprehending the technicalities beyond certain level. But due to their better IQ, they will be able to appreciate the facts better, if they are shown things in three dimension.
As for the second point, the Mock up Drill, it has to be explained to the local people through the People's representatives and the Leaders who organized these protests, that it is something similar to any mock up drill associated with any such industries. It is there in Refineries, it is there near any Chlor-alkali industry, it is there in any Fertilizer Industry, etc. Just because these drills are conducted, you can't say that we will not permit the plant.
It is like telling your children what to do in case of a fire wound or when you have a cut. First you explain them how to avoid fire or cut. Still at the end, you explain them what to do in case of a fire wound or cut ! It is exactly similar to that. Nothing offensive or dangerous about it.
Also, Mock up drills are a mandatory thing like the safety instructions while traveling in aeroplane. You can not say, I have traveled hundreds of times and hence I do not want the safety instructions / boring demonstrations !
So, in the overall interest of the Nation, especially the Southern district people themselves, they shall visit the Plant atleast once before coming to any conclusions.
Given the energy shortage and the lack of industries in this region, majority of the educated persons from southern districts are moving to Chennai leaving their kith and kin back in the villages / towns. The numbers are so high that it is next to impossible to get a ticket in the Bus / Train for going to Deepavali / Pongal to see their kith and kin. Whether any one likes it or not, it is a fact that the problem is acute beyond Madurai.
The educated ladies shall come forward first and insist that they shall be taken inside, since they will not have the opportunity to see the plant later on.
Why anyone shall just go by what I am saying or what the agitating leaders are saying ? Why not see for yourselves and try to judge by yourselves ?
Lets stop usage of nuclear power b'coz of its radioactive hazards.
Lets stop the usage of thermal power b'coz the natural resources are being depleted.
Lets stop the hydro power b'coz due to the construction of dams n hydro power plants surrounding wild life and humans are affected alot.
Facts on Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project. -your have right to know the truth.
1. Site Clearance for Kudankulam-1&2 (KK-1&2)
The sites offered by the states for setting up nuclear power projects are evaluated by the Site Selection Committee (SSC) of the Government. The SSC evaluates the sites in line with the criteria laid down in the AERB Code of Practice on Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Siting, which inter alia, gives the mandatory and desirable requirements of the site from safety considerations. These include assessment of seismicity, location of faults, geology, foundation conditions, meteorology, potential of flooding (from tsunami, storm surge, etc. at coastal sites and from rain, upstream dam break, etc. at inland sites), proximity to airports, military installations, facilities storing explosive and toxic substances, etc. The environmental setting comprising of bio-diversity, including flora and fauna, marine ecology etc. in the region is also evaluated. In addition, availability of land, water, electricity demand in the region and the availability of other energy options also form the basis for evaluation. The SSC submits its recommendations to the Government. The Government after due process, accords ‘in principle’ approval for the site.
Kudankulam site was also evaluated by the then Site Selection Committee and approved after due process then prevalent.
Ministry of Environment & Forest (MoEF) and other statutory Clearances
On receipt of ‘in principle’ approval, pre-project activities including obtaining environmental clearance from MoEF and site clearance from AERB are taken up, in parallel with preparation of detailed project report.
The Environmental Clearance for KK-1&2 was obtained after following the due process then prescribed by the MoEF. An Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) had been carried out. The MoEF notification for environmental clearance process then in force did not envisage public hearing. However, subsequently, while obtaining the environmental clearance for KK 3&4, Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) as per EIA notification, public hearing including the responses to stakeholders, review by expert appraisal committee of MoEF as per the prevalent notification of 2006 was carried out. Detailed studies comprising Geo-technical examination, Seismo-tectonic, Safe grade level, meteorological and other studies were carried out by the expert agencies of organizations specializing in these. Based on these studies, the detailed site evaluation report was submitted to Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), who after a detailed review, accorded site clearance for Kudankulam site. The project financial sanction based on the Detailed Project Report (DPR) prepared was obtained in February 2001 and the work on the project was started after obtaining necessary clearances by following the due processes in place at that time.
Exclusion Zone and Sterilized Zone
According to the AERB code an area in the radius of 1.5 km, called exclusion zone, around the reactors is established, where no human habitation is permitted. This area forms the part of the project and is included in the land acquired. The AERB Code of Practice on Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Siting states:
An exclusion area of appropriate size (at least 1.5 km radius from the reactor centre) shall be established around the reactor and entry to this is to be restricted to authorized personnel only.
Thus the population falling within the exclusion zone, if any, is only resettled.
The sterilized zone is the annulus between the exclusion zone and an area up to 5 km from the plant. The AERB code states in this regard:
“A sterilised area up to 5 km around the plant shall be established by administrative measures where the growth of population will be restricted for effective implementation of emergency measures. Natural growth, however, is allowed in this zone”.
Thus, there is no displacement involved in the sterilized zone. In fact, there are no restrictions on natural growth of population in the sterilized zone. The administrative measures are put in place to ensure that there is no large increase in the population due to say setting up of an industry involving large labour force, etc.
3 Population Distribution
The AERB Code of Practice on Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Siting lays down desirable criteria for population for selection of a site as follows:
“Other desirable population distribution characteristics in plain terrain are:
i) Population centers greater than 10000 should not be within 10 km of the plant.
ii) The population density within a radius of 10 km of the plant should be less than 2/3 of the state average.
iii) There should be no population centres more than 100000 within 30 km from the plant.
iv) The total population in the sterilised area should be small, preferablyless than 20000.”
It may be reiterated that these are only desirable criteria and are prescribed to enable easy emergency planning.
For the purpose of planning for serious accidents, if any, an area of 16 km around the plant is considered as the Emergency Planning Zone. The AERB Code of Practice on Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Siting states:
During emergency, availability of transportation network means of communication, etc. which are of significance during emergency condition shall be checked. A radial distance of 16 km from the plant may be considered for this purpose.
It may be, however, noted that in the KK reactors design, many advanced safety features are deployed. These include the passive heat removal system (PHRS), which will ensure cooling of the fuel under the most stressed condition of non-availability of power supply and cooling water and further also there is the provision of core catcher to contain the molten material and the radioactivity within the reactor, even under the most severe accident resulting into the fuelmeltdown. Such and other safety provisions strengthen the plant such that the intervention in the public domain beyond exclusion zone will not be required even in case of a severe accident.
4 Effect on Fishing
Requirement of cooling water is not unique to nuclear power plants. The generation of electricity using heat in the form of steam from fossil fuels like coal, gas, oil, etc. involves condensing of steam in a power condenser, which requires cooling water. In a similar manner, the generation of electricity from nuclear source also uses steam and thus needs cooling water. Ships, submarines and motorboats also use the seawater for cooling their engines.
The cooling water temperature observed at the outlet of the power plant condenser is slightly higher than the ambient temperature of the water, which is, in fact, lowered at the discharge point by employing systems/engineering solutions so as to be within the limit stipulated by the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF). The effect of this discharge water on the marine life has been studied extensively and validated.
Based on these thermo-ecological studies, Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF) has stipulated as follows:
Quote:
“The thermal power plants using sea water should adopt suitable system to reduce water temperature at the final discharge point so that the resultant rise in temperature of receiving water does not exceed 7°C over and above the ambient temperature of the receiving water bodies.”
Unquote:
The operation of nuclear power plants in the country at the coastal locations at TAPS, Tarapur in Maharashtra and MAPS at Kalapakkam in Tamilnadu has also not shown any adverse effects on marine life including the fish.
At Department of Atomic Energy-Board of Research in Nuclear Sciences (DAE-BRNS) Thermo-ecology study was carried out at Kalpakkam and Kaiga stations with several experts from institutions like National Institute of Oceanography (NIO), Central Electro Chemical Research Institute (CECRI) and several universities of the country. These studies have not found any adverse effect on marine ecology around the nuclear power plant sites.
Kudankulam nuclear power project cooling water system also provides for fish protection, which ensures fish are not sucked into the intake.
5. Radiation in the Surrounding Area
Utmost attention is given to safety of the environment and the public in all aspects of nuclear power from siting, design, construction, commissioning, and operation and up to decommissioning. The entire effort is to ensure that release of any radioactivity or radiation in the public domain affecting the public and the environment is minimized to be well within the prescribed regulatory limits. The radiation dose from nuclear power plants in operation in India has been found to be a negligible fraction of the naturally existing background radiation.
An Environmental Survey Laboratory (ESL) is set up at the site which collects data of several environmental matrices like air, water, soil, vegetation, crops, fish, meat, etc. It establishes a baseline. Subsequent to start of operation of the station, the ESL monitors the environmental matrices even beyond emergency planning zone of 16 km (usually up to 30 km of the site) for radioactivity (elements like Iodine-131/133 Strontium-90 etc) and radiation levels. The experience over the last 40 years has been that at such distances no significant increase in radiation levels above the baseline data is found at Indian nuclear power plant sites.
6. Assurance of Quality
High quality standards are incorporated at all stages of works under the project. The Assurance of Quality is accorded highest attention in all activities of nuclear power plants from design, construction, commissioning and operation. Quality assurance system provides stage-by-stage development and implementation of detailed quality assurance programs at execution of all kind of the works. The construction works are carried out in accordance with a Quality Assurance Manual. The quality assurance plans in line with the manual are prepared for each activity. In respect of civil construction, the materials used are tested for every batch at the concrete testing laboratory at the site. The construction QA personnel inspect the works as per the QA plan and the works carried out after approval of the QA staff. The records of testing and inspections, which are extensive, are well documented. The regular reviews of the quality are carried out by internal audit teams within NPCIL as well as by AERB.
The quality of construction of civil works and piping has been proven at Kudankulam. The reactor building containment has withstood the structural integrity and leak rate test at the test pressure, which is much higher than the design pressure. The pressure test of various piping systems and the hot run has also established the excellent quality of construction at the site.
7. Coastal Zone Regulation
The coastal zone regulations as applicable have been meticulously followed by NPCIL. In case of KK-1&2, the approval for CRZ was under the Prime Minister Office (PMO). Due diligence studies were carried out and clearance obtained. In respect of KK-3&4 CRZ clearance, the required data and information, as required by the expert appraisal committee of the MoEF, have been submitted.
8. Safety Features of KK-1&2
TA unique combination of inherent, active and passive safety systems are provided at KKNPP. With principles of defense-in-depth, high levels of reliability, redundancy, diversity and separation several qualified Safety Features are provided at KK-1&2.
The Kudankulam project consists of two units of advanced model of Russian VVER-1000 MW Pressurised Water Reactor, which is a leading type of reactor worldwide. The design has been evolved from serial design of VVER plant, of which 15 units are under operation for last 25 years. The VVER design adopted at Kudankulam has in additional many unique safety features as per our specifications . The design of these units is not identical to Chernobyl or the BWRs at Fukushima. These reactors fall in the category of advanced Light Water Reactors. The salient safety features incorporated in plant at Kudankulam are:
• Passive heat removal system (PHRS) to provide natural cooling for removal of decay heat. Which will ensure cooling of the fuel under the most stressed condition of non-availability of power supply and cooling water and further also there is the provision of core catcher to contain the molten material and the radioactivity within the reactor, even under the most severe accident resulting into the fuel-meltdown. PHRS works without any external or Diesel power or manual intervention ( unlike in Fukushima).
• Quick Boron Injection System (QBIS)- ensures reactor shut down in case of less-effective operation of emergency protection system by injecting high concentration borated water into primary coolant by inertial rotation of cooling pump’s. This passive system works without any external or Diesel power or manual intervention.
• Provision of Multi-redundant safety trains.
• System of emergency 1st and 2nd stage hydro accumulators. These systems intended for passive supply of borated water solution into the reactor core. System works passively without any external or Diesel power or manual intervention.
• Passive Hydrogen Recombiners-the system is designed to avoid the formation of the explosive mixtures inside the containment by maintaining the volumetric hydrogen concentration in the mixture below the safe limits, thereby protecting the containment integrity. The passive catalytic recombiners works passively without any external or Diesel power or manual intervention.
• Annulus passive filtering system is provided to maintain vacuum and cleaning fluid in inter-space between double containment. System works passively without any external or Diesel power or manual intervention. System keep inter-space between double containment at negative pressure to reduce releases significantly.
• Higher redundancy for safety systems (four redundant sets of equipment)
• Double containment
• Larger numbers of control rods
• Additional shutdown systems for the reactor like second quick-acting shutdown system and quick boron-injection system
• Advanced instrumentation systems of advanced technology for Reactor Systems and Balance of Plant as well as for Plant Computer System
Safety review on setting up this project is carried out by AERB over and above the regulatory review carried out for these reactors in the Russian Federation.
The safety features of Kudankulam project have been comprehensively reviewed by a task force of NPCIL in the context of the recent Fukushima accident and it has been found that the safety features of the reactor are adequate to withstand such extreme natural events. The report of the task force is available on websites of NPCIL and DAE.
9.Seismic Considerations
Kudankulam site is located in the lowest seismic hazard zone of the country, Zone-II. The nearest epicenter of a recorded earthquake was located near Trivandrum, which is situated at a distance of 88 km north-northwest of the Kudankulam site, where two earthquakes corresponding to 4.3 magnitudes on Richter scale, were recorded. The Kudankulam site has a much lower seismic hazard when compared to Fukushima in Japan.
The Kudankulam plant buildings have been designed for much larger earthquakes. The structures, systems and equipment of plant are designed for an earthquake magnitude of 6.0 on Richter scale with a peak ground acceleration of 0.15 g. An evaluation of the plant based on allowable stress values of materials has indicated that it can withstand significantly higher peak ground acceleration (of up to 0.6g).
Tsunami
Kudankulam site is located far off (about 1500 km) from the tsunamigenic fault (where tsunamis originate). Thus a tsunami would take time and lose some of its energy by the time it strikes Kudankulam site.
As against this, the tsunamigenic fault was only about 130 km away at Fukushima.
The Kudankulam site was not affected by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami due to its design of higher finished floor level. The water level experienced at the site due to December 26, 2004 tsunami triggered by a 9.2 magnitude earthquake was 2.2 m above mean sea level.
There is also a shore protection wall and important buildings are located higher than the flood level arising out of tsunami, storm surge, wave run up and tides. The buildings housing emergency power supplies are located further higher.In addition to location at higher elevations, all the safety related buildings are closed with double gasket leak-tight doors. Hence, water entry into these buildings is extremely remote even in case of sea water level surge reaching upto their elevations.
These aspects have been comprehensively reviewed by a task force of NPCIL in the context of the recent Fukushima accident. The report of the task force is available on websites of NPCIL and DAE.
10. Cost of the Project
The approved cost of the project is Rs. 13171 crore. The expenditure figures are submitted to the various monitoring agencies of the project like DAE, MOSPI and Parliamentary Committees and are thus in the public domain.
The tariff of electricity generated by the project will be competitive with other sources in the region and expected to be around Rs 2.50 per unit.
12. CSR Activities
With an objective of inclusive growth of the surrounding population and community development in the neighboring villages around the Kudankulam project, through well-structured CSR programs, NPCIL has taken several initiatives:
Infrastructure Development:
Some of these initiatives include, construction of class room buildings, compound Walls of schools, providing the drinking water facilities like bore wells with pump & low level Sintex water tanks, water pipeline scheme for providing water from Rukandurai village to Panchal village (about 3.5.km), providing computers with accessories to a large number of village schools/Panchayat Offices, providing fire extinguishers to schools, providing electrification and tiled flooring to the Mercy Home for Disabled persons, providing solar street lights and sodium street lights to the villages, construction of Lavatory for the use of schoolchildren, construction of two bus shelters at Perumanal & Kuttapuli Village, providing furniture & other items for the community hall constructed by the Panchayat Union, improvement of building for mentally retarded children and Panchayat Office building in Chettikulam Panchayat, etc.
About 17.6 km of road leading from Levinchipuram to Kudankulam was also developed by NPCIL.
Health Care:
Several medical Camps have been organized in the surrounding villages. Hepatitis 'B' Vaccine was administered to the school/village children, hearing aids to the schools for hearing-impaired have also been provided.
Education Support:
Provided laboratory items at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kudankulam, ceiling fans to Govt. Higher Sec. School, Chettikulam, and provided uniforms to School Children.
A Talent Nurture Program to provide quality education to the bright and talented children of the rural/ economically backward class living in the vicinity of KKNPP has been instituted. Atomic Energy Education Society (AEES) has offered to admit the students from the nearby areas. Under this programme, economically backward children from the neighbouring villages with rural background will be selected based on merit for admission to Standard – I in AEC School, Anuvijay Township.
Support to Community at Coastal Villages:
Tsunami Relief Activities were carried out in the year 2004-05 in the nearby coastal villages such as Idinthakarai, Perumanal, Kuthenkuzhi and Kutapuzhi such as distribution of Dress Materials, Bed Sheets, Biscuits, Sugar, Milk Powders, Food Pockets, Soaps and Garments, Mobilization of Local to safe places & financial assistance to Purchase of Land for Re-Construction of Houses.
The neighbourhood welfare activities are continuing and will be further enhanced in future in line with the objective of inclusive growth.
TO ALL MY ANTI AND PRO KNPP FRIENDS: IT IS UNTRUE THAT THE POWER GENERATED IN KNPP WILL HELP TAMILNADU.
"THE POWER GENERATED IN KNPP IS TO BE TRANSMITTED TO SRI LANKA THROUGH POWER GRID".
Mr Mathiyalagan
Are you just joking? or intentionally spreading rummer? or you really do not know that the beneficiary states of the KKNPP are TAMILNADU – 925 MW, KARNATAKA – 442 MW, KERELA – 266MW ,PONDICHERRY – 67MW AND UNALLOCATED – 300 MW.
These are all written documents.
Ok thanks for information.What you provided is any written agreement ,goverment GO or just press news by ministers.The current government of india never meets its commitment or its word (commonwealth,bofors,blackmoney )even against india's prestige.They wont care about whole nation then how they will care about 1 million people.Dont repeat the same thing TN will benifit,we are not fundamentalist as well as we are not jokers.We know how the constitution of india is respected by so called patriotic peoples.Terrorists of religion will get all benifits from vote bank politicians but ordinary citizen of same religion are targetted by gundas(Gujarat attrocities) .High fi dharna (Anna,Ramdev)all are covered by media for incentives of politicians but wont cover the dharna by north east social activist irom sharmila.Appose the UP goverment by person of india's first family for land aquatation but same party goverment in another state simply kills public protesters by police firing.The PM will personally urges the western country to consider the ban of durban but he wont pressurise the srilankan government for tamil fishermens.INDIAN Goverment raises voice against in UN war violation in libya but mum about lankan war crime .No steps to resolve bandh in manipur .No steps to resolve telengana but supports UP division.CBI raid against jegan mohan reddy & ramdev .Sikh violence,Amar singh parliment bribe sacm etc.Just self intrest politics not thinking about country.I can given so many failures of this western self-interest influenced goverment decisions but it is too long.Even british goverment surrended to the mahatmas non-violence but this government surrender only to bribes.The father of nation is Gandhi but the own goverment wont follows his words even to own common people. India is democratic nation but from 1947 to till date power is within the single family,what the family thinks about any national issues that is indian goverment decision(Rules etc) who cares about peoples feelings.Most feared powerful rulers of ancient india (Ashoka&Akbar)not ruled beyond this family rule but still india is democratic nation.
Constitutional rights of India looks great to read but countries reality is different
1) Right to equality, including equality before law, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment, abolition of untouchability and abolition of titles.
2) Right to freedom which includes speech and expression, assembly, association or union, movement, residence, and right to practice any profession or occupation (some of these rights are subject to security of the State, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, decency or morality, right to life and liberty, right to education, protection in respect to conviction in offences and protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.
3) Right against exploitation, prohibiting all forms of forced labour, child labour and traffic in human beings;
4) Right to freedom of religion, including freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, freedom to manage religious affairs, freedom from certain taxes and freedom from religious instructions in certain educational institutes.
5) Cultural and Educational rights preserving Right of any section of citizens to conserve their culture, language or script, and right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice; and
6) Right to constitutional remedies for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
what is government interest ? If you spend time & recall you will come to know why they pay bribe to MP's related to nuclear bill.Own Money to MP for national cause? or the return of gain?
Dear Mr Samidurai
The power distribution agreement was signed with the Ministry of Power, India and various beneficiary states indicated by me.
A huge investment of about 14000 cr in the Sate in the very basic infrastructure like electricity should be welcomed by person like you who has a very wide range of awareness and sensitivity on the very important issues of the country.
These power project were signed much before the 123 agreement of USA. At that time the nuclear power program of our country was facing untouchability by the all the nuclear countries. In 1988,our best friend USSR has came as friend in need and signed an agreement for supply of the these Units of KKNPP that to with a very low interest loan. This all money is being spent by central Govt. and NPCIL ( A Govt of India Enterprise)
At various stages of this project, it has, in-fact, willingness of all from Late Rajiv Gandhi, Sh Atal Bihari and Sh Dev Goda in Center and Ms Jayalalitha and Mr Karunanidhi in the State.
I have seen the documents regarding agreement of 925 MWe power to Tamil Nadu. I will be happy if you believe in a countryman like you.