The article “How Fukushima is relevant to Kudankulam” (March 8) rightly points to the vulnerable design and inadequate safety norms in the Japanese nuclear plant which were previously unknown. But are we drawing the right parallels? The Fukushima disaster was a result of negligence and poor design. But Kudankulam is a third generation nuclear reactor, the safety of which has been found satisfactory by many experts, including A.P.J. Abdul Kalam.
I am surprised that nobody is talking about the Kalpakkam plant, a second generation nuclear reactor that shut down safely during the 2005 tsunami and was restarted six days later. Let us draw lessons from our own experiences and not get carried away by hypothetical situations and concerns.
Although people's safety is the foremost priority, all citizens cannot go in person to Kudankulam to evaluate the nuclear plant's safety. We should trust Mr. Kalam when he says the plant is safe. Are we ready to live with insufficient energy in the future? Let us hope people in and around Kudankulam will realise the situation and allow the plant to start functioning.
Viza Nagarjuna Reddy,
One wonders why the government revoked the visa of the Japanese woman, Maya Kobayashi — who was in Fukushima when the disaster struck — invited by Greenpeace India to share her experiences with communities living near proposed nuclear sites. Such exchanges promote cordial and friendly relations among nations. Did the government fear that her visit would trigger more protests against the Kudankulan nuclear plant?
Pudi Pawan Kumar,