Yesterday, I accidentally came to know that today is the 20th infamous anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster (April 26, 1986). So I’m hastily posting an article that I’ve been writing, but not quite finished. I say hastily, because I wanted to collect more data and figures before I make this post. However, since today is the Chernobyl anniversary, I felt that it would be the most appropriate date for this post, looking at the mistakes that others made in the past and perhaps learning something from it.
The initial euphoria of the Indo-US nuclear deal has long since died down, and the way things stand, it’s going to be bumpy ride before the US Senate ratifies the treaty. In promoting nuclear energy, the USA is also advancing its benefit. In the near future, India’s plans are to import 8 nuclear reactors. This, I believe although not sure, are for Tarapur Atomic Power Project 3 and 4 (Maharashtra), Kaiga Atomic Power Project 3 and 4 (North Karnataka), Kudankulam Power Project 1 and 2 (Tamil Nadu), and Rawatbhata Atomic Power Project 3 and 4 (Rajasthan). US is certainly gleeful over the prospect of getting at least 2, if not more, contracts for itself, and this fact comes straight right from an article called “Our Opportunity With India” in The Washington Post by Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of State. According to her, just 2 contracts will generate employment for thousands of US workers. With a bit of diplomacy, I think it is an improbable certainty that US will get at least the bare minimum of what it wants. Another reason for US’ vested interest in promoting nuclear energy in India is our booming economy and industry, which is craving for energy and raising the demand significantly for oil in the international market pushing up prices significantly. India's goal is to have 20,000 MWe nuclear capacity installed by 2020. If we achieve our nuclear energy generation targets, that will put a lesser burden on the international crude prices and also for US.
It is well known that Indian economy is booming at a rate of 8% and the aims are at 10% of annual growth. It’s not going to be an easy task considering the fact that the country is facing a huge energy crisis. To sustain the momentum, India is looking forward to nuclear energy as a ‘cheap’ and ‘clean’ option (?). Also add to the fact that it will lessen our dependence on fossil fuel based power, which has its own disadvantages. Coal is highly polluting and the supply of oil is the monopoly of the OPEC cartel largely dominated by the middle east which itself is a hotbed of unrest and violence. The price of crude has been rising significantly over the past few years, and the dependence on oil is proving to be a major hindrance for India. During the Kuwait crisis, India almost ran out of oil stocks with reserves barely enough to sustain domestic needs for about 1 month if I remember that right. We can’t have such a situation happen again at this juncture of economic growth. Those in power also do not forget to miss out on emphasizing the point regarding the pollution caused by fossil fuel based power plants. The CO2 emissions of India from such power plants itself is accounted to be in the tune of 170 million tons which is the total CO2 output of a country like Netherlands. The point that is clearly missed that nuclear energy is far from being a clean fuel, perhaps we can call it a superficially clean fuel. Superficial because in a nuclear plant, we do not see the thick smoke emanating from sky-high chimneys associated with fossil fuel based power plants. The risk of radiation exposure exists in each and every stage of production of nuclear energy, right from the mining of ore to ore processing to generation of energy to waste disposal. Nuclear waste is highly radioactive and needs to be disposed away in sealed containers buried deep under the earth away from any sort of human or natural interference in order to prevent any radiation leakage. Although it may sound very simple, but practically speaking, it is never a fail-safe method. The risk of spillage of radiation into the environment is omnipresent. Burying it deep in the ground may sound like a good enough option but in a seismically active country like ours, even that doesn’t sound very reassuring to me. An earthquake can easily cause a rupture in the sealed containers and cause them to leak. Worse still, since the leakage will take place underground and without any tools to prevent it, we may not find out about it until the Geiger counter comes alive and the harm has already been done.
From a security point of view, I feel it’s just a big mistake. In an event of war, a conventional attack on any of the nuclear plants can have as devastating enough an affect as using a nuclear warhead. A terrorist strike may sound really far fetched and paranoid, but we thought an attack on the Parliament too as impossible until December 13, 2001, happened, that too when both houses were in session. In the recent past, there have been reports coming into limelight about terrorist sleeper cell agents being active in defense and other sensitive organizations and carrying out espionage activities. HAL had one such incident not so long ago. A terrorist strike need not be carried out with Kalashnikovs and Chinese made grenades. A sleeper cell agent working inside a nuclear plant is quite capable at that and a bigger threat than an attack right upfront. Such cells can strike anywhere but at a nuclear plant, it will be one of the most devastating.
A real and greater possibility than a terrorist strike is something going wrong in the plant, be it for human error or technical malfunction. Both US and Russia have had nuclear accidents. While the one at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, didn’t cause any major issues, Chernobyl, Belarus, wasn’t so lucky as we all know. According to recently released damning report by Greenpeace (click2download), it is estimated that more than 270,000 people will develop cancers and 93,000 people fatal cancer in the future. In the last 15 years, 60,000 people have died in Russia because of Chernobyl and estimates of the total death toll for the Ukraine and Belarus could reach another 140,000. This figure does not take into account the various other non-fatal diseases, genetic mutation defects, etc. The fallout of the radiation crossed boundaries and reached until eastern United States apart from contaminating large parts of mainland Europe and England. The effects of the disaster will be felt for hundreds of years to come. The worst radiated regions will be totally unfit for human inhabitance for 900 years.
The Chernobyl Unit 4 Reactor was of 3200 MWe capacity and much larger than the 240 MWe and upcoming 540MWe capacity reactors of India. The major cities of India are a stone's throw away in terms of nuclear radiation fallout. Narora plant (Uttar Pradesh) near New Delhi, Trombay (Maharashtra) near Mumbai, Kakrapar (Gujrat) which is again near to Mumbai besides Ahmedabad , Kaiga near Bangalore, Kudankulam and Kalpakkam (Tamil Nadu) near Chennai. In the unfortunate event of even a small disaster for whatever reason, it can possibly contaminate a large part of the country and all major cities with high levels of radiation. After all, there have been “200 near miss” accidents till date throughout the world that have largely gone unreported in the media or not given due coverage. The question is whether we can deal in any meaningful way the ensuing humanitarian and economic catastrophe. It is a question than can have only a negative answer.
It has been 2 decades since the Bhopal gas tragedy. More than 15,000 people were killed and 150,000 to 600,000 injured. The Government’s response to the tragedy has been so flawed and callous that even now the factory has not been “cleaned up” properly. Chemicals still leak into the ground from decaying containers polluting the soil and underground water reserves. The hapless victims of the tragedy still have to stage dharnas and satyagrahas at the heart of the capital to make their voices heard in the corridors of power. From an economic point of view, the economic burden of dealing with the number of probable radiation victims, providing them with medical care and rehabilitation will be a Herculean task and capable of crippling any economy beyond repair. All the growth and boom can be just wiped out by an unfortunate twist of fate, a single nuclear accident.
There is also a possibility that such an accident may never happen. Being a Sagittarian, I think its only natural to be an optimist about the whole radioactive topic. If India is lucky enough to pull it off without any mishaps, it’ll really thrust the nation into the league of developed countries. CO2 gas levels, as mentioned above, will fall significantly. However, the million-dollar question is, what if things go wrong somewhere someday? Is it really worth taking the risk? Do we really need to turn a blind eye at the potentially fatal risk that we are getting into for a few Rupees more? Our greed of growth might turn into a horrible dream that will last for hundreds of years. I would rather pick economic backwardness and/or slower growth rather than have a nuclear accident and consequent near-eternal economic backwardness coupled with a population plagued by cancer and genetic mutations for generations to come. By the time the radioactive dust of the fallout settles down on us, the glitter of India shining would have instantly rusted and decayed resembling the sarcophagus over Chernobyl Unit 4 Reactor and the ghost town that now surrounds it.
[PS: This article may contain few unintentional factual errors due to the paucity of time I faced at the time of this post. I shall make every attempt to cross check and make necessary edits as soon as I get the time. Inputs from Greenpeace,Wikipedia, and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd etc on the net.]
Nine-year-old Alexandra with her father Vitaly in Gomel, Belarus. Alexandra has a birth defect, called hydrocephalus. Vitaly has quit his job to care for his daughter. The family lives in the fall out zone of the Chernobyl disaster.
Sisters Irina and Elena live in an area of Belarus contaminated by the Chernobyl disaster. Both have had brain tumours removed and now have problems with their thyroid gland.
Galina has thyroid cancer. For surgeon Igor Komisarenko, most of his patients are thyroid cancer victims: "The closer to Chernobyl, the higher the chances of getting thyroid cancer."
Nastya, from Belarus was only three years old when she was diagnosed with cancer of the uterus and lungs. According to local doctors the region has seen a huge increase in childhood cancer cases since the Chernobyl disaster.
Natalia had a brain tumour at 8 and her little brother Kostya has Down’s syndrome. They live near Mayak, the site of a former nuclear plant in Russia and the most radioactively polluted place on Earth. Radioactive waste was poured straight in to the river. Their mother swam in the river and blames it for her children’s illnesses. "We didn’t know there was anything wrong until many people became ill. We called it river disease."
Ramzis has hydrocephalus. “I don’t like to go to school, because the boys call me bad names. The girls avoid me and don’t want to go out with me. I hope I will not have children who look like me.” Ramzis lives near Mayak, the site of a former Russian nuclear plant and the most radioactively polluted place on Earth.
Ardak lives in the highly contaminated Semipalatinsk nuclear test zone in Kazakhstan. He is 33 and suffering from a rare bone disease that makes his body shrink. His doctors don’t know what is wrong and think he may die. He has shrunk more than 30 centimetres.
In the cancer ward of a Kiev hospital in the Ukraine, 19-year-old Elena is being treated for her second case of thyroid cancer in just 3 years.
Posts
