Draft agenda outline
Objective: To
empower the group of participants with the knowledge about nuclear power
generation and impact of it over society and nature. The participants should
feel the immediate need to
react over current plan by existing governments including India and US.
Audience demography:
A group of 50 people. Politically conscious with distinct and diverge political views.
Suggested points
as discussion outline pointer:
Why there is a need
for nuclear power – It is assumed that audience is already convinced about
the fact that unlimited usage of fossil based energy consumption will lead to
two unavoidable disasters:
1.
The natural sources will be exhausted
2.
It will cause global warming – thermal power
especially coal based power plants are seen as major contributor to the cause
of global warming.
In this light, the audience is already convinced about
nuclear power as a better and greener option. The general mainstream media
propaganda qualifies Chernobyl as human error and Fukushima as one of the stray
incidents which can be avoided with due measure and precautions. Some of the
propaganda for example identifies GE Mark 1 design as a primary cause of the
disaster. According to them, it could have been avoided easily had Fukushima
upgraded to better technology. It is seen as an issue of compliance where the
state regulatory bodies will have to enforce the compliance model without any
corruption. Promoting nuclear power is a declared agenda by Obama. Recently,
Obama has announced plans to cut U.S. oil imports by 30 per cent over the next
decade at a speech to an audience at Georgetown University, 30th
March. A similar feeling is shared by common urban middle class people.
All is well but
…..
Even if all is well i.e. we apply the best in class
technology to generate power, there are a few points which need special
attention. These are:
·
The average cost of nuclear power generation is
very high. In U.S Nuclear power plants typically have high capital costs for building
the plant, but low fuel costs. Therefore, comparison with other power
generation methods is strongly dependent on assumptions about construction
timescales and capital financing for nuclear plants. Cost estimates also need
to take into account plant decommissioning and nuclear waste storage costs.
·
No technology can ever guarantee protection from
all kind of possible disaster like unplanned power failure. The Mark 1 design
flaw for example, was highlighted 35 years back by Dale G. Bridenbaugh and two
of his colleagues at General Electric. They resigned from their jobs after
becoming increasingly convinced that the nuclear reactor design they were
reviewing -- the Mark 1 -- was so flawed that it could lead to a devastating
accident.
·
Commissioning and monitoring the compliance
model has seen the history of corruption and fake accounting for example Days
before Japan plunged into an atomic crisis after a giant earthquake and tsunami
knocked out power at the ageing Fukushima nuclear plant, its operator had admitted
faking repair records - AFP reports. August 2002 Japan – A widespread
falsification scandal starting in that led to the shutdown of all Tokyo
Electric Power Company’s 17 nuclear reactors; Tokyo Electric's officials had
falsified inspection records and attempted to hide cracks in reactor vessel
shrouds in 13 of its 17 units. India’s standing per Transparency International
- India’s Corruption Perception Index: 3.3 in a Scale of 0 to10 10 (highly
clean), 0 (highly corrupt).
·
The cost of a disaster recovery from a potential
disaster is substantial for an economy to collapse. The estimated cost assessed
so far of Fukushima disaster is about 200 Billion USD. The cost of Chernobyl in
Belarus for example is estimated at £235 billion. Relate the recent nuclear
liability bill in this context.
·
Under normal operation with no special media
attention, there are regular leakages from nuclear plants for example
o
Fifty-five workers at the Kaiga plant needed
medical treatment for excessive exposure to radiation after tritium
contaminated a water cooler. – source BBC News, 29 Nov, 2009.
o
“Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in
potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear
plant, now taints at least 27 of the nation's (US)104 nuclear reactors — raising concerns about how it is
escaping from the aging nuclear plants.” – Associated Press 1st
February, 2010.
o
ROCKVILLE, Md (Reuters) -- Managers of a big
Texas nuclear power station told U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff last
week they do not know what caused a leak in the plant's reactor, a discovery
that could set off safety shutdowns at dozens of other plants.
o
December 12, 1952 - A partial meltdown of a
reactor's uranium core at the Chalk River plant near Ottawa, Canada, resulted
after the accidental removal of four control rods. Although millions of gallons
of radioactive water poured into the reactor, there were no injuries.
o
October 1957 - Fire destroyed the core of a
plutonium-producing reactor at Britain's Windscale nuclear complex - since
renamed Sellafield - sending clouds of radioactivity into the atmosphere. An
official report said the leaked radiation could have caused dozens of cancer
deaths in the vicinity of Liverpool.
o
Winter 1957-'58 - A serious accident occurred
during the winter of 1957-58 near the town of Kyshtym in the Urals. A Russian
scientist who first reported the disaster estimated that hundreds died from
radiation sickness.
·
The danger of proliferation of nuclear weapons.
All of the new nuclear weapons states obtained their weapons under the guise of
nuclear power generation. The difficulty of distinguishing between civilian and
military nuclear programs is exemplified by the situation in Iran. Known
reserves of uranium are only sufficient to meet the world's total energy demand
for two years. It is sometimes argued that a larger amount of electricity could
be obtained from the same amount of uranium through the use of fast breeder
reactors. But fast breeder reactors are prohibitively dangerous from the
standpoint of nuclear proliferation because both the highly enriched uranium
from the fuel rods and the plutonium from the envelope are directly
weapons-usable. It would be impossible, from the standpoint of equity, to
maintain that some nations have the right to use fast breeder reactors, while
others do not. If all nations used fast breeder reactors, the number of nuclear
weapons states would increase drastically.
Nuclear submarine – a hidden power station
that kills sea when it gets killed in military strike. As for example:
Israel bombed Syria nuclear reactor. Israel
destroyed a secret Syrian nuclear reactor in September 2007, according to a US
diplomatic cable cited in the Israeli Yediot Ahronoth daily.The cable, which
the Israeli paper said it had obtained ahead of its publication by WikiLeaks,
was written on April 25, 2008, by then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and
stated that “on September 6 2007, Israel destroyed the nuclear reactor built by
Syria secretly, apparently with North Korea’s help.”Yediot said the cable
provided the first official confirmation of the attack…..
·
The problem of disposing of nuclear waste has
not been satisfactorily resolved
The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste
Repository is the United States' designated deep geological repository storage
facility for spent nuclear reactor fuel and other high level radioactive waste.
The repository is to be on federal land adjacent to the Nevada Test Site in Nye
County, Nevada, about 80 mi (130 km) northwest of the Las Vegas metropolitan
area. The repository was within Yucca Mountain, a ridge line in the
south-central part of Nevada near its border with California.
Although the location has been
highly contested by environmentalists and residents, it was approved in 2002 by
the United States Congress. Funding for development of Yucca Mountain waste
site was terminated in 2010 and the NRC license application was withdrawn in
March 2011. This leaves the United States without any long term storage site
for its high level radioactive waste, currently stored on-site at various
nuclear facilities around the country. The Department of Energy is reviewing
other options for a high level waste repository.
Bottom line: There are only
theoretical solutions available till date for the radioactive wastes including
medical usage.
"All the waste in a year
from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk." – Ronald Reagan.
·
At best, nuclear power generation can supply
only a small fraction of the world's energy needs, and because of limited stocks
of uranium and thorium, it can only do so for a short time.
·
If a careful accounting is made, the CO2 emitted
by constructing nuclear power plants, running them, mining and refining the
uranium, and decommissioning the plants is comparable to that emitted by
coal-red plants.
·
In the countries where it is presently used,
nuclear power generation is heavily subsidized, and if it were not for these
subsidies, it would not be able to compete with wind energy or solar energy. It
is vital that the subsidies be shifted from nuclear power to the development of
various forms of renewable energy.
·
Global stand after Fukushima about nuclear power
generation:
o
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard has
ruled out the possibility of nuclear power in Australia.
o
Switzerland has suspended plans to build new
nuclear power stations until it has carried out a thorough safety review.
o
And German chancellor Angela Merkel has
announced a three-month stop on plans to extend the operation of nuclear power
plants.
o
“Beijing announced on Wednesday that it had
suspended approval for nuclear power plants across the country, putting the
brakes on a development programme that accounts for almost 40 per cent of the
world’s planned reactors.” - Financial Times,
16 March
o
Germany this week (16 March, 2011, FT) idled
one-third of its nuclear capacity.
o
Spain, Switzerland, the U.K. and U.S. have all
announced safety reviews.
·
Case study and detailed analysis of Chernobyl
and Fukushima covering areas of contamination, effect of general rise in cancer
among population, water, air and land. (Planning to show some documentaries and
picture collages about these)
·
History of nuclear accidents so far – statistics
and /or specific cases
o
Civilian nuclear accidents
o
Civilian nuclear incidents
o
Civilian radiation accidents
o
Crimes involving radioactive substances
o
Military nuclear accidents
o
Nuclear and radiation accidents
o
Nuclear tests and fallouts e.g. Pokhran
o
Sunken nuclear submarines
o
In India
|
Nuclear power accidents in India
|
||||
|
Date
|
Location
|
Description
|
Fatalities
|
Cost
(in millions 2006 US$) |
|
4 May 1987
|
Kalpakkam, India
|
Fast Breeder Test Reactor at
Kalpakkam refuelling accident that ruptures the reactor core, resulting in a
two-year shutdown
|
0
|
300
|
|
10 Sep 1989
|
Tarapur, Maharashtra, India
|
Operators at the Tarapur Atomic Power Station find that the reactor had been leaking radioactive
iodine at more than 700 times normal levels. Repairs to the reactor take more
than a year
|
0
|
78
The
on line hours of unit 1&2 in 1990 were 7772 and 7827 hrs (source IAEA
PRIS. Repairs lasting more than one year from 10 Sep 1989 can not yield such
on line hours.surely something is wrong.
|
|
13 May 1992
|
Tarapur, Maharashtra, India
|
A malfunctioning tube causes the
Tarapur Atomic Power Station to release 12 curies of radioactivity
|
0
|
2
|
|
31 Mar 1993
|
Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh, India
|
The Narora Atomic Power Station suffers a fire at two of its steam turbine blades,
damaging the heavy water reactor and almost leading to a meltdown
|
0
|
220 The cost data is not on
comparable basis. 2400 or so US 2006 $s for TMI and 220 for NAPS unit 1 is
wrong.
|
|
2 Feb 1995
|
Kota, Rajasthan, India
|
The Rajasthan Atomic Power Station leaks radioactive helium and heavy water into
the Rana
Pratap Sagar River, necessitating a
two-year shutdown for repairs
|
280
|
|
|
22 Oct 2002
|
Kalpakkam, India
|
Almost 100 kg radioactive sodium
at a fast breeder reactor leaks into a purification cabin, ruining a number
of valves and operating systems
|
0
|
30
|
·
Vision of India in nuclear power program – India
has a flourishing and largely indigenous nuclear power program and expects to
have 20,000 MWe nuclear capacity on line by 2020 and 63,000 MWe by 2032. It aims to supply 25% of electricity from
nuclear power by 2050. Currently nuclear energy is fourth major contributor
after thermal, hydraulic and renewable energy sources. India’s vision of
nuclear power:
o
Stage I - Pressurised heavy water reactor
o
Stage II - fast breeder reactor
o
Stage III - Advanced nuclear power system
·
On the ground fight by people at Haripur and
Jaitapur - Safety at Jaitapur not my responsibility: Jairam Ramesh 16 March,
2011.
A French company, Areva, however
is building the world's largest nuclear power plant, that too based on
technology that has not been completely tested, in the pristine, beautiful
coastline of Ratnagiri (Jaitapur Town), India.
• Once a nuclear plant is built it cannot be completely shut
down and has to be maintained for perpetuity costing multiple times over the
cost of building one proving that Nuclear energy is definitely not cheap.
• Today we don't need missiles to sabotage a Nuclear power
plant and a computer hacker sitting in some nondescript corner of the world can
do a much better job of sabotage and perhaps destruction of a nuclear power
plant as the Stuxnet virus that has delayed the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant in
Russia and threatens to do the same to Iran's nuclear facility in Natanz show.
• Half life of the spent fuel Plutonium in the reactor is
over 24,000 years i.e. its danger is reduced to only half in that time and they
have to be kept for an eternity, literally, before the spent fuel (the used
Uranium from reactors) for it to become safe completely.
• The proposed Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant in Ratnagiri
district of India, with 6 reactors, is an act bordering on lunacy because even
if there is damage to one, all six will have to be closed which besides causing
irreparable damage to ecology and the entire region, will lead to a loss of
billions of dollars.
Approximate monetary estimation of commissioning Jaitapur
plant:
For 6 reactors – 10 x 6 Billion USD i.e. 60 x 100 = 6,000
crores of Indian rupees approximately.
The life of the reactor expected – 30 years, can be extended to 40 years max with risk of major accident.
The decommissioning cost of the reactors – 1.5 to 2 times of commissioning cost i.e. between 9,000 to 12,000 crores of Indian rupees approximately.
The life of the reactor expected – 30 years, can be extended to 40 years max with risk of major accident.
The decommissioning cost of the reactors – 1.5 to 2 times of commissioning cost i.e. between 9,000 to 12,000 crores of Indian rupees approximately.
Note that in last U.S. presidential campaign a number of
contestants including Hillary Clinton, agreed on record that nuclear power
option is not viable for U.S. for two reasons:
a)
It is too much costly
b)
There is no technical answer till now for nuclear waste management.
·
How to use RTI for getting more information
o
May we know what is the fund allocated and
reserved for a possible disaster that warrants complete relocation of nearby
people with appropriate readiness?
o
What is the square mile of impact (dead zone) in
case of a possible disaster?
o
How will we know that the plant is not leaking
radioactivity?
o
What is the waste management plan for the plant?
o
Are the security concerns – internal and
external sabotage factors being considered? If yes what is the estimated cost
and is it included in plant commissioning and maintenance cost? How will this
cost be recovered?
·
Why mainstream media do not educate us? Is it a
non issue?
·
History of data and accounting statistics
provided so far. Chernobyl was denied completely by the administration in 1986
first.
·
Alternatives – the scope of this document limits
this part. However following are some basic thought pointers:
o
Why we are not focusing on energy efficiency?
Shopping mall lightning for example reflects our attitude towards the
consciousness about this.
o
Improving the efficiency of existing nuclear
power plant which is 50% – 55%
o
Improving the logistics in distribution and
thereby can save i.e. earn an extra 13% without commission any new power plant.
No comments:
Post a Comment