nuclear-news

The worst part, adding to the confusion and resistance, is that the scientific community itself seems to be split.

The current Chairman, Dr Srikumar Banerjee, and the former Chairman, Dr M. R. Srinivasan, of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), are quite convinced about the ability of the Commission, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AREB) and the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) to guarantee the safety of nuclear power plants and their preparedness to prevent and meet any emergencies.

UNPREPAREDNESS

At the other end, there is the former Chairman of the AREB, Dr A. Gopalakrishnan, who has come out with a blunt assertion in a published article, contrasting Japan’s “superb” management of the Fukushima catastrophe with the situation in India.

“In India”, he says, “we are most disorganised and unprepared for the handling of emergencies of any kind… The AERB’s disaster preparedness oversight is mostly on paper and the drills they once in a while conduct are half-hearted efforts which amount more to a sham”

He has joined the Director of the Indian Institute of Science, Dr P. Balaram, and other prominent figures in the energy sector, in writing an open letter to the Prime Minister accusing the DAE of “cavalierly” minimising the potential of an accident, and urging the Government to “radically review” its nuclear policy.

“Pending the review,” they have said, “there should be a moratorium on all further nuclear activity, and revocation of recent clearances for nuclear projects”, given without regard to India’s ramshackle infrastructure and largely untested emergency procedures.

A recent survey of nearly 10,000 people in various parts of India showed 77 per cent to be worried about the safety of nuclear power plants and 69 per cent distrustful of India’s capacity to handle a nuclear disaster.

Weighing on their minds must be the corruption, delays and heartlessness of the Government in dealing with the aftermath of the Bhopal disaster and, in general, addressing the imperatives of relief and rehabilitation of the people after natural calamities far less in scale and magnitude than a nuclear disaster….

In this background, it will be monumental folly on the part of ruling establishments at the Centre and the States and the scientific community to dismiss concerns about the safety aspects of nuclear power generation felt by the people in India, particularly those living in habitations near where nuclear reactors have been installed, or the erection of new ones is going on or being planned. To do so with spurious arguments will only aggravate the existing fears…..The issue is far larger than just Koodankulam. There are lingering doubts about the safety measures being reliable, workable and effective….