Reassessing Nuclear Energy and the controversy surrounding the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant
One of the most burning topics and issue of much contention at present in India is that of resorting to nuclear power to meet the massive energy demands in the country . It is common knowledge that in India as in many developing nations energy shortage is extremely acute, and energy availability is just a small fraction of the actual need to meet the day to day requirements of the masses and to sustain industry, which has to grow multi-fold to improve living standards. Traditional sources of power have become grossly inadequate and the need to rapidly develop additional sources of energy is becoming very urgent.
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant
Till recently nuclear power had been considered an ideal source to meet the ever-surging power needs in the country. There was apparently no significant opposition to it in the country, unlike even in some developed nations where opposition is spearheaded by organisations such as the Greenpeace. It really appeared to be very promising. But overnight hope has coming crashing down with the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster following a massive earth quake and tsunami. Particularly this has resulted in stiff opposition to the nuclear power plant under construction at Kudankulam in Tamilnadu. Intensive and extensive protests are going on in many parts of the country against nuclear power in the nation. Many political parties, NGOs and social activists have joined the bandwagon. While all concede to the need to generate additional power the primary concern of the protesters is one of safety.
While safety has always been a matter of much concern in the installation of nuclear power plants in the past, it had been mostly in relation to accidental leakage of radio activity due to human error or technical breakdowns. Another major worry has always been the safe storage and disposal of spent fuel which can cause serious risks to local communities and the environment . In addition, with a surge in global terrorism the possibility of potentially dangerous nuclear material falling into wrong hands with disastrous consequences looms large. Governments had in the past successfully convinced local communities about their ability to safeguard against these potential risks, and several nuclear power plants are operating in many parts of the world despite serious accidents as those at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.
All along not much concern has been expressed on the risk posed by possible natural disasters to nuclear power plants. But with Fukushima the focus has sharply shifted to their safety in relation to their location with reference to possible natural disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis. This appears to have given a boost to the Kudankulam protesters who claim that their fears are justified since the place is prone to tsunami risks as seen from the events of 2004. Though opinions are divided, it is rather ironical that even many scientists and technologists, including some nuclear specialists, are unable to ensure total safety of these installations. Some even express reservations against building new nuclear power plants. Even a highly developed nation like Germany has recently decided to discontinue nuclear power generation.
No clear-cut solution appears to exist to solve the problem. One alternative suggested is massive power generation through renewable power sources such as solar, wind and tidal power. As of now it is estimated that India needs to generate an additional 50 or 60 thousand MW of electrical power annually to boost development. The pace of development of alternative energy sources in the country is so slow that there is hardly any hope that even part of this target could be achieved in the near future. Another major issue is the potential rapid and severe environmental degradation that would result in efforts to boost higher energy generation using fossil fuels. Except for possible radio active leakage, disposal of wastes and disposal of the high temperature water that comes from cooling the reactors, nuclear energy is relatively clean.
A reasonable solution to the situation seems to be a compromise involving highly regulated use of nuclear power with massive increases in alternative and renewable sources of energy. Total rejection of nuclear power would be similar to the proverbial act of throwing the baby out with the bath water. On the other hand, critical evaluation of each and every proposal for a nuclear power plant by highly competent experts, and its installation and operation ensuring all fail-safe risk protection standards, is imperative. Above all effective education and enlightening of the surrounding communities, both on the need for and indispensability of nuclear power, and at the same time addressing their safety concerns, will go a long way in making nuclear power acceptable in the long run, meeting the energy needs required to significantly boost development and improve living standards .
