The disaster at the nuclear reactor in Fukushima, Japan, in the aftermath of a tsumani earlier this year cannot be made the yardstick to oppose the Kudankulam nuclear power plant, according to S.C.Chetal, Director, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam.
Speaking to reporters after inaugurating a national seminar on medical thermography at SRM University in suburban Kattankulathur, he said India had an excellent record of safety in its nuclear installations.
“All nuclear power plants in India are designed with tight safety features that can withstand earthquakes and tsunamis and other natural calamities like cyclones,” Mr. Chetal said. Noting that the nuclear site at Fukushima in Japan could not be compared to the one at Kudankulam or Kalpakkam, the senior scientist said nature's conditions were different across the world.
The nuclear reactor at Kalpakkam had demonstrated its safety during the tsumani of December 2004. “During the tsunami, there was no damage to any of the installations at Kalpakkam and the reactor was completely safe, considering the height of the waves was 4.7 metres,” Mr. Chetal said.
Observing that the Japanese nuclear tragedy in the aftermath of the tsunami was not nuclear-related, the scientist said the safety of the Kudankulam reactor could not be questioned as Russians had a very good track record in safety. “We learn from failures,” he remarked.
All the nuclear reactors were designed with high levels of safety, he said, recalling that during the earthquake at Bhuj, Gujarat, which had caused enormous damage, the nuclear power stations were safe. India had a strong safety regulatory system. The Kudankulam reactor was a Pressurised Water Reactor and 80 per cent of the world's 430 reactors used this technology.
He was reacting to questions from reporters about the widespread protests by various sections, including political parties, which sought that work on the Kudankulam plant should be stopped and also to the extent of shutting down the reactor at Kalpakkam.
Mr. Chetal added that the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor would be commissioned next year. Work on building the Fast Reactor Fuel Cycle Facility, which would be re-processing the spent fuel at PFBR would start this year.
Keywords: Kudankulam nuclear power plant, Kudankulam protest, nuclear power, nuclear safety, Fukushima nuclear accident, nuclear disaster
Japan is an economic power.Their method of handling any crisis situation is far more superior than we can even think of. They have edge in technology and can achieve anything even after such crisis. Japan can afford to pump money like sea water to handle such crisis. India will not find money to take care of crisis because all the money must be floating in swiss banks. Tsunami at kalpakkam speaks volume of our capabilities. Whenever there is a disaster, these responsible claim it was 'unforeseeable' so as to escape blame. People who are held responsible may be bailed out by the government.You are right Mr.Chetal. Japan is not an yardstick.
Mr Chetal should graciously resign for his lies. First of all Russian Chernoble nuclear accident was the worst(second to Fukushima) and it occurred while they were putting in a so-called safety mechanism. Miles of Russian land is inhabitable FOREVER, AND OVER A MILLION PEOPLE DIED FROM THE ACCIDENT, the documents relating to the deaths were in Russian and not translated to the convenience of this lying nuclear industry. The small Tsunami of 4.5 metres is a joke and Sri Lanka has been detached from south India through massive Tsunamis of 20 to 30 metres height. Back up generators WILL NOT WORK when they are submerged, which is what happened in Fukushima. Chennai would do well to remove Kalpakkam or it will be totally unihabitable if a massive Tsunami strikes the southern coast. Two tragedies, Tsunami and nuclear explosion, are impossible to contain as Fukushima as shown us! Alternative wind and solar systems are the power for the 21st Century.
Japanese reactors were also designed to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis, however, the design parameters proved insufficient in the real world. That is, the designers underestimated the possible severity of the natural events that could -- and did -- occur. The same problems exist for storage of nuclear waste, which must be adequate to prevent invisible and highly toxic/mutagenic radioactive poisons from being released into the soils and waters for the next 100,000 years (one thousand centuries!). This is a time span 20 times longer than recorded human history. Tell me, how can anyone make such a promise?
We have failed to contain these wastes even in our own short lifetimes. Who can know what sorts of disaster lie ahead in the distant future . . . including deliberate acts of terrorism and warfare, in which nuclear reactors become targets.
Why can't all the nuclear scientists join together and sort out the apprehensions of the people at Kudankulam?? Rather than making the issue a political drama, the dialogue should be held with the people of the local community and the authorities concerned.
Please Email the Editor