A lot has been said on the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant in the last few days. The former President, Abdul Kalam, has weighed in with his judgment. The plant appears to have up-to-date safety standards. There is no reason to doubt the capabilities and intentions of the engineers. Even the U.S., which operates about 100 plants, relied heavily on Indian engineers in building that capacity over the last 40 years. I am one of those who worked for 34 years in the American nuclear industry. Kudankulam is not “absolutely risk free.” Nothing in real life is.
There is no reason to doubt the motives of protesters, especially the villagers living close to the plant. Evacuation drills must be unnerving and the pictures of the Fukushima disaster must be fresh in their minds. Responsible people ought to help allay those fears. Mr. Kalam has done his best. We need to keep in mind that the Kudankulam plant is a part of nation-building. It is needed for the energy security of the country.
Ranga Palaniswamy,
Pollachi
Any scientific invention carries with it a risk, and a nuclear power plant is no exception. We cannot remove fear from our minds unless the object of fear is removed. But in the case of Kudankulam, it is not possible as the government has already invested a huge amount in the project. No one can give guarantees for the future as it is uncertain. Nature can play havoc at any time as it did in Fukushima and Chernobyl.
The government should have taken the support of the local people before starting the hazardous project. Our politicians are taking advantage of their fear and instigating them. Mere assurances from scientists and scholars will not yield any result. They will not come to the rescue of people in case of a calamity. Only the government can instil confidence in them.
V. Anand Kumar,
Chennai
Villagers in and around Kudankulam should be made aware of the importance of nuclear energy. When France can use nuclear energy to meet more than 75 per cent of its energy needs, why can't we use it to produce electricity?
Nuclear energy is environment friendly and renewable. Although there are some safety concerns, we should understand that no man-made technology is 100 per cent secure.
Manjeet Hooda,
Sonipat
This refers to the special essay by Mr. Kalam and Srijan Pal Singh (Nov. 6). Dismissing the decision of a few European countries to phase out nuclear power does not effectively explain why large power-hungry economies with much higher per capita power consumption and a significant dependence on nuclear energy in the past have decided to phase it out.
In the absence of a convincing answer, any economic or social project in and around Kudankulam would be akin to giving lollypops to people.
A.K. Chandra Shekhar,
Chennai
The Kudankulam issue concerns not only the nuclear power project in the coastal village of south India but also future nuclear projects. The question is about not just the safety of the people around the site but also the allowable or desirable extent to which humans can intervene with the natural laws that govern potentially high-risk areas like the atom in which the process of play will be irreversible. One wonders whether Mr. Kalam has allowed his world vision to be clouded by limited interests.
N. Janardhanan,
Nagercoil
After reading Mr. Kalam's article, many of those opposed to nuclear power like me tend to support the Kudankulam project which is vital for development. Trust building in the minds of people is an important component of negotiation. Misgiving and mistrust can be dispelled with a Gandhian touch. In a democracy, people are supreme. Nothing can be achieved without their cooperation.
K. Ramachandran,
Vriddhachalam
