With the death of one person and injuries to several in police firing against the background of violent protests against the proposed nuclear power complex at Jaitapur in Maharashtra's Ratnagiri district, the controversy surrounding this project is all set to escalate. Some responsibility for this lies with the leading political opposition in the State, the Shiv Sena, which has spotted a political opportunity in the widespread unease among local communities in and around the proposed project area. However, the main reason for the rising tensions in Ratnagiri district is the peculiar intransigence of the State and central governments in this matter. Despite the Japanese nuclear emergency, they have dogmatically refused to put further execution of the project on hold; this is reflected in Minister for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh's statement last week that the project was a fait accompli. Risk theory as well as elementary norms of democratic governance suggest that nuclear power projects cannot be thrust on unwilling communities, in business-as-usual fashion. Predictably, the continuation of construction work on the boundary of the project area set off the latest round of protests.
The Japanese nuclear emergency has hardly abated. That the promised review of Indian nuclear installations has already been partially completed without any role for independent scientific expertise or public interventions suggests little willingness on the part of the central government and the atomic energy establishment to reassure the public through a transparent and thorough exercise. Even the scale of the Fukushima calamity appears to have done little to modify the insensitivity the Manmohan Singh government has shown on nuclear matters. The passage of the Nuclear Liability Act to reassure potential foreign investors in India's post-deal nuclear industry appeared to take precedence over safeguarding the interests of the Indian people; it actually happened during a countrywide stocktaking of industrial and environmental safety on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the Bhopal gas calamity. The current attitude to the Jaitapur protests only heightens the perception that assuaging genuine safety concerns in an open, democratic fashion matters little to a government that privileges the realisation of the nuclear deal above all else. There is no question of ruling out nuclear power tout court — but there is certainly a need for a larger debate, post-Fukushima, on its role vis-à-vis other sources of energy, including both fossil fuels and renewable sources. Forcing questionable projects on apprehensive communities after a traumatic international disaster is not the intelligent way to go.
Keywords: Jaitapur nuclear plant, Ratnagiri, post-Fukushima, Jairam Ramesh, violence
Surprising to hear these views from The Hindu. Just because an accident happened in Japan, it is immature to say to halt work at Jaitapur. We all accept the fact that more checks and standards will be required with such risky technology, but halting the usage of it is very ridiculous.
If I read carefully and correctly, I see that the editor also mentions that there needs to be transparency. Indeed, halting the development programme could be hazardous to the overall energy requirement, having the nuclear hazardous wastes around the region would always be of high risk. Nevertheless, the opposition's protests are understandable (even though opportunistic). If there is a way to go, the governing body might as well make a public statement, educate the masses about the benefits and the hazards and then go ahead with the plan rather than the current brutal suppression of protests and creating a political mess. For once, lets try to be a wee bit civil.
The Jaitapur issue is not simply an issue of power generation.It is all about forcing a community to accept something they don't want to happen in their homeland. Our government is still following the same draconian rules made by the British to evit people from their land in the name of development. Most of the people who support this kind of forced development sit in the comfort zones located in cities. So they don't want to know what is happening to people in the villages which are hundreds of kilometers away from their cities. They don't know the pain of forced evictions, so they can give big lectures on development.
Unlike a dam burst or a coal fired powerplant explosion, a nuclear explosion renders a whole area useless for centuries. It cripples the life of generations, the living examples of whom still live in Japan and Russia. Even now, even in developed countries like Germany the disposal of spent fuel is a cumbersome task and that's why the government of Germany is scrapping its nuclear power plants.Will a technologically superior country like Germany scrape its nuclear power plants for no reasons?
India is a tropical country with enormous hydropower generation capabilities. If we construct numerous mini hydro electric projects(Mini hydro elcetric projects submerge lesser area and are much more safer than large projects) across the country,then that itself has the potential to solve India's growing appetite for energy.
The argument seems to be logical, govt. should gain public confidence, there should be comprehensive study of the safeguard measures adopted by the govt. And another important issue seems to be the land acquisition issue; there should be proportional compensation for land owners. Without gaining the public confidence there seems to be no end of this row.
It is not the first time that political aspiration is taking toll on india progress. While i agree that transparency must be maintained, but it is illogical to sacrifice such an opportunity for mere interest of few. Iisn't Tarapur nuclear plant situated in the heart of Mumbai good example that explain nuclear power plant need be seen as ghost. Nuclear energy is the dire need of India at this moment when it is on the path of overall development. Fukushima power plant was updated technological example of 1960s. But today nuclear technology is much more advanced. Hope this issue is resolved soon to present a win-win situation for India and Indians.
Anil Kotwal, the core of Fukushima is melting and emitting radiations harmful to living beings. If scientists were so sure about the safety of the plant then why not they build it near a densely populated area? To reduce the extent of a possible calamity, right? I don't think under these circumstances majority-minority support does matter. India's heart is in it's villages, spare it.
With ever growing population and insatible commercial and domestic appetite for power, the time has come to make decisive and bold decision.India has a brilliant track record when it comes to Nuclear safety.Moreover, the technical know how that country gets exposed to by such cutting edge technology is immense. Nuclear fission reactors are stepping stone to realize the holy grail in energy security : the controlled Nuclear fusion.Every technology has its flip side, but true human ingenuity lies in maximizing the pros and minimizing the cons.I belive in endeavours and skills of Indian engineers and scientists:they have showed in the past and will in future .Nuclear power is utmost in catapuling India to a world super power.
Nuclear based power project is the one of the vital source of clean and alternative energy. Instead of halting the project, public should be considered as one of the projects stakeholders and their confidence in the project should be taken in to consideration. Project team should sit with public and inform them what they are doing and understand the concerns of local population and try to address those concerns ASAP. This will ensure the success of the nuclear power project. In the mean time, central govt. should re-review the safety aspect of nuclear plants from various known and unknown sources.
YES... India should explore tax credit options to Solar and Wind based green power technologies. The NUCLEAR industry has failed to solve the used rods' storage issue for decades. The recent Japanese disaster has forced many governments to revisit the PSA (Probabilistic Safety Analysis) and review it. A country like India with inadequate and questionable damage control policies and resources with larger densely populated exposure, they must skip nuclear power generation option. There is no guarantee against natural disasters but exposure to highly populated countries like India could be eschewed. Go Green!
A very timely editorial that raises very pertinent issues. Work on the Jaitapur nuclear plant cannot go ahead till the confidence of the local communities, which are going to be most affected by it, is won. It is deeply condescending to assume that people cannot think for themselves and that political parties and 'some NGOs' are inciting them. I don't want a nuclear plant in my neighbourhood, and I do not see why I should expect it to come up in someone else's backyard until safety and livelihood issues are addressed.
While your anguish is understandable, your crusade (in keeping with your comments on Bhopal tragedy)is conspicuous by absence on the subject of risks connected to the Kudankulam plant. The Russians do not carry any liability and Tamilnadu is Tsunami-prone. Will you advise to close down the plant?
No amount of assurances on the reliability of nuclear reactors can be accepted on face values since they are the types that emanate after every accident. It is true that all disasters are followed by higher technical research and greater financial investment for increasing the safety of the systems. Perhaps, none doubted the Japanese expertise in constructing nuclear power stations in the highly earthquake and tsunami prone islands there until the present tragedy. Our own projects shall be viewed or reviewed in the light of happenings in Japan. Unfortunately, the Indian authorities and government scientists, It seems, are more eager to woo some foreign investors in the area than listening to the anxieties of the illiterate masses here. Any foreign intentions to invest and expand nuclear power reactors here can only be part of their agenda to become greater and stronger political and economic power among the world nations. Perhaps Japan also entertained the same hopes like other developed countries. One has to come to the realisation that the unlimited number of nuclear reactors coming up around the planet tends to be one among the various activities of over-exploitation of Mother Earth for which man has to pay.
There need not be an Armageddon to stop an extremely undesirable and dangerous project whose safety is not yet fully evaluated.That too in a country where law prohibits civillians from possessing even an elementary radiation detecting equipment like a geiger counter.From another viewpoint it really is Armageddon for the residents living within 20 kilometer radius of Fukushima plant for whom their hearth and home is declared a no go zone. Today it was a tsunami, tomorrow a meteorite hit can blow the whole core into the atmosphere.A rare event is not an impossible event.Then it would be Armageddon for everyone.
The furore over the Jaitapur Plant is politically motivated and NGO's desire to steal the show by dramatising civilian grievances.Jaitapur has been given clean chit by eminent scientists and civilian dispute can be settled considering the importance of this nuclear power project.I urge the political parties to come up with rational ideas and stop oppurtunising social misunderstandings.India should strive for all round development and energy is the fuel to achieve that.
We should rethink about Jaitapur Plant. The question certainly arises if not nuclear then what? We should take a look at non-renewable energy sources. Solar Energy is biggest freely available source. Why the money, which is being used to build that plant, cannot be used to provide subsidy to people on Solar Items? This not only results in awareness about non-renewable energy use but also help to multiply the funds by people contribution for personal benefit. This will save lot of environmental hazards. There will be very less maintenance expenses every year compared to that for nuclear plant. Someone might say that there is problem of space. Solution to this problem is use of rooftop space and Barren Land. This will save lot of energy. Remember 'Energy Saved is Energy Generated'. Other way is providing energy efficient equipment at lower rates. Government should use the money in such activities where debate and risk is less and effective work will be more. Looking at it from political angle, people will get benefited personally thus providing well wishes to party.
Nuclear Plant will be seen as immediate solution to power crisis. This will definitely give us solution for short period of time may be for next 50 years but afterwards it will become problem. How to dispose the nuclear waste? How to keep the people away from the nuclear radiation effects? What to do when the structure will go out of reliability? Lots of Environmental concerns will emerge. If the plant needs to be demolished, what to do with that land? It cannot be given to use where people will work. It will be definitely very difficult to find answers to these problems. We are not in such bad crisis where there is no other way than Nuclear Plants.
I think a detailed analysis of the Japanese incident should be made out and each misconception refuted point by point. People have made a big deal out of the Fukushima incident without knowing the details. People just need to hear the word 'nuclear' and they go ballistic. Not to mention the opportunist opposition parties trying to reclaim their vote base by engaging in populism. The state government is also to blame partially because it does not publicise its program properly. Conferences and meetings should be held to educate the residents meticulously. There is no use just fretting because people there "just don't get it". How will they, unless the state makes an earnest effort.
After fallout of Bhopal case,it's really not possible to think that indian govt can take care of people's interest if such tragedies happen.So if people feel sceptical about Jaitapur project then it can't be called their fault.
Government is all stressed to use such ways of development which are suspicious of proving harmful in the long run to the fragile ecology as well as the health of people directly. Is there no other alternative or the government is just not willing to use other alternatives. Our country being a tropical one has abundant sunshine which can be tapped exhaustively and we need not beg raw material to run it from aliens. But I see no enthusiasm for the development of solar power plants(much safer and cleaner) on large scales for meeting the energy needs.
I haven't expected the editorial which takes us back to old stone age. As we all know India is lagging electricity and power which can't be addressed without nuclear energy. And all the people in the mainstream power management has agreed that no option is available for India. In this case how can Hindu take one way and support Siva sena's opposition!! Please revert this article and save future of India. This looks more of political article targeting PM and nothing worth for the country.
There is little doubt that we have to re-think about our nuclear power plans like Jaitapur, post Fukushima. And if necessary, we must give up the idea of setting up the Jaitapur project. However, the question is what next? How to generate power? There is opposition to coal fired power plants; there is opposition to acqusition of land for industrial purposes. The political parties in opposition rarely think in an unbiased manner when it comes to such issues. Therefore, in all cases of land acquisition for projects, the State governments have to make all efforts to place before the public all the facts. Those who oppose (both public and the politicians) have to be told of the consequences. If a majority of people still do not want a project,the government should accept the wishes of the majority.It is of course difficult to convince politicians who are more concerned with power than with economic welfare.
Your edit is biased. The fact of the matter is that despite all the scare mongering Nuclear plants across the world have had a high level of safety. Even in Fukushima despite the combined blows by a 9.6 Richter scale earthquake and devastating Tsunami the core of the plant has held. Armageddon , as was being predicted in some quarters did no happen. In Jaitapur it is the politically irresponsible and oppurtunistic organisations like Shiv Sena and some NGOs who are stoking the protests. It is all very well to talk about safety guarantees but then it is incumbent upon all concerned to come up with alternative sources of badly needed energy. Nuclear energy is time tested and clean all it needs is high levels of professional competence and safety standards.
Brilliant and balanced commentary. Why does our government continue to shut out the voice of the public in matters of governance. Why should the local community not be allowed to have a say in the matter. Just because they have voted a regime into power does not give them carte-blanche to do whatever they wish. Yes, there is a risk of vested interests trying to derail discussion if civil society is involved in govt discussions before decisions are made. But surely we can come up with mechanisms that allow a platform to debate and discuss such important matters between the govt and the public before decisions are made. Happens in mature democracies all over the world, why not we do it too. Root cause of Civil unrest these days is because our representatives have failed to raise these issues in Parliament on our behalf. So the people now have to take to the streets and do what our lawmakers should have done.
Seems like authour is asking to ban all motor vehicles since there is an accident in some place he know. All big projects has is ills and benifits. A single coal fired plant with 2000MW capacity in the area will do more environmental and health damage than the 6 proposed nuclear reactors over Jaitapur
I'm surprised to find 'The Hindu' opposing the power plant at Jaitapur. Didn't we all support Manmohan Singh's nuclear pact with GW Bush? We supported it because we believed it was in India's interest, that no cost is high cost for nation's energy security? Then why at a time when policy is put to practice, are we dragging our feet? The govt should go on with the project with a view that "the public does not always necessarily know what's best for them". As for objections on the grounds of safety, had Fukushima not occured, would anyone have raised their voices? We should compare nuclear power with air travel where in case of an accident, chance of survival for all involved are close to 0%, and conventional power (coal) with road transport, accident does not necessarily be a big deal. Yet statistics show that all over the world far more people die/render themselves permenantly disabled in road accidents than air accidents. Air travel proves to be safer due to high costs/care taken with regard to safety. So if you oppose nuclear power, by extending the same logic you should not be travelling by air either!
Please Email the Editor