Kudankulam plant is absolutely safe even without the 17 recommendations of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, says NPCIL
During a hearing in the Supreme Court on Thursday on petitions related to the Kudankulam plant, Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the plant got a vague environmental clearance in 1989 when the site was not decided, no Environment Impact Assessment was done and no public hearing was conducted which was mandatory under law. He said three critical changes were made in the plant.
He said, “Under the earlier plan, the spent fuel was to be stored in Russia, now it will be stored at the plant. Earlier water was being taken from the local dam, but now it will be taken from the sea, and earlier the Ministry of Environment and Forests had said that change in sea water temperature must not be more than 5 degrees but now it will be 7 degrees without any MoEF clearance.”
In its response, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) said, “The Kudankulam plant is absolutely safe even without the 17 recommendations of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board. Even if a Fukushima [in Japan] type of incident were to occur, the Kudankulam plant is fully equipped with all the safety measures to withstand any such unlikely event. This, however, does not mean that the 17 recommendations made by the AERB will not be complied with.”
With regard to the vulnerability of the plant to terrorist attacks, sabotage, etc., the NPCIL said it had elaborate physical security arrangements in place . Addressing the apprehensions about storage of spent fuel, the NPCIL said, “The entire spent fuel is not treated as waste, as the same can be re-processed to recover useful nuclear fuel. The spent fuel discharged is to be stored under water in a pool within the primary containment. A capacity of more than seven years of full power operation of reactor will be available in the pool. After this time, this spent fuel can be transported to a national facility for re-processing.”
Keywords: Kudankulam nuclear power plant, vague clearance, Supreme Court, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
Nuclear Plants are not safe at all. How can NPCIL say Koodankulam is
100 percent safe and we can deal with Fukushima kind of accident to
SC? Isnt that a big lies?
Every child in Koodankulam shud send post cards to Judges......It is
big lies told by AERB and NPCIL. So Koodankulam shud be stopped
immediately.
If that is so safe, why are the NSG companies and their Indian
corporates are begging Indian Govt to withdraw/dilute the Nuclear
Liability Act? Why did they spend big money when the Bill was tabled
in Parliament?
Why insurance cos, World Bank, Wall Street etc treat the nuke power
plant as an untouchable?
We can't even deal with a fire cracker factory blast. How can we deal
with a nuclear disaster? It is big lies.
Just look at good genuine scientists who have told Nuclear Energy is
not safe at all.
Why are countries stopping their Nuclear Reactors? Are they all fools?
Why are we not thinking of moving ahead with solar and wind energy
which we have in plenty ?
I think that by now NO ONE in their rational and educated minds will believe NPCIL to
speak the truth on any matter relating to Nuclear Issues. First we have the lies about
Thorium being our salvation for electricity when their project Kakrapur has started
and stalled twice costing us tax payers crores of rupees. Now their idle boast of fast
breeder reactors using Plutonium when it was the Plutonium in the three reactors
that blew off the tops of the reactor buildings in Fukushima. Then also the fact that
to date REAL nuclear scientists have yet to get such a reactor using recycled
Plutonium running.Then their lies at all is well at Fukushima when the situation is
steadily getting worse and radio active water and waste just increasing and
accumulating and the Japanese going mad not know which way to turn as they are
caught in the GRIP of this deadly bloodsucking industry. INDIA WILL BE IN SERIOUS
TROUBLE IF IT TRUSTS THIS GROUP OF ENGINEERS posing as nuclear scientists.
BEWARE !
In our time-scales 7 years is not too far way. The response that ".
. . spent fuel CAN BE transported to a national facility for re-
processing" indicates that more than 20 years after the project was
conceived, there is no finality even as of now, on this important
aspect and GOI is not quite sure what to do. Will the reporc
facility (to be built, hopefully with in 7 years!) be co-located at
Kudankulam to be built, for this fuel which is under IAEA anti-
proliferation-safeguards? Or will the spent fuel have to be
transported out to the Kalpakkam facility or elsewhere in
India/abroad? In both cases, we may expect even more strong
agitations in future, citing dangers in locating a reproc facility
at Kudankulam and transport of spent fuel by land / sea / air,
although personally, I do not support such mal-founded opposition.
Please Email the Editor