http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/devangshu-datta-india-s-nuclear-dilemma-116040701060_1.html
Devangshu Datta
The country is expanding its nuclear energy capacity in a big way. But the logic for it isn't obvious - indeed, alternatives like renewables can be rolled out much faster and cheaper
April 7, 2016
If an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public, or the environment, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls upon those taking such action or implementing such policy." The Precautionary Principle quoted above has guided international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol. It applies when making policy about climate change, genetically modified food, public health, etc.
The principle also applies to nuclear energy. A nuclear accident may have terrible consequences. Apart from causing death, radiation can render large areas uninhabitable. Running a reactor involves storing lethal radioactive waste for centuries, and decommissioning a reactor is also tricky and dangerous.
Most nations cut back on nuclear power after the 2011 Fukushima incident. Japan shut down all reactors, although 30 per cent of its power came from nuclear at the time. (It is now considering reopening some plants.) Germany will totally shut down its nuclear plants by 2022. France will reduce dependence on nuclear to 50 per cent of generation by 2025, down from the current 75 per cent.
India, on the other hand, will vastly expand capacity. Political commitment for this is strong. Manmohan Singh risked his government's future when he pushed the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Agreement in 2008. The Left Front withdrew support to the United Progressive Alliance in its first term as a direct result. The Bharatiya Janata Party is also pro-nuclear.
The logic for expansion isn't obvious. Nuclear is touted as clean (assuming there are no accidents). But power from the planned new capacities will be expensive compared to renewables, which carry much less risk and can be installed much quicker.
India will also depend on uranium-based fuel imports, leaving it hostage to diplomatic pressures. The new capacities will be uranium-fuelled. India already needs fuel imports to keep current capacity running. While India has ample thorium, it is at least a decade away from serious thorium-fuelled capacity.
India has 5.8 gigawatt (Gw) of capacity, which contributes almost three per cent of total generation. It targets 14.8 Gw by 2021 and 27.5 Gw by 2032, with 25 per cent of generation by 2050. Six reactors are under construction, 36 more are planned. Companies such as EDF-Areva, Toshiba-Westinghouse, GE Hitachi and Rosatom will supply reactors and related equipment.
India has 21 operational plants. There have been several minor accidents over the years, the most recent one being a coolant leak at the Kakrapar reactor in Gujarat, which led to a shutdown for over two weeks in March. That was Level 2 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (Ines), which is one level below "Serious".
The opaque structure of the nuclear establishment makes it hard to judge safety standards. The apex Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) reports to the Prime Minister's Office. The AEC oversees the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). The DAE runs the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and the Uranium Corporation of India. The NPCIL runs the nuclear power industry. The AERB sets safety standards. The AEC need not release information, even to Parliament. It is obsessively secretive due to the conflation of military and civilian use.
New reactors could be expensive and will, almost certainly, overshoot schedules. A big constraint is Nimby, or Not In My Backyard opposition from civil society. Protests have slowed down timelines at Kudankulam (built with Russian equipment) and Jaitapur (French). The Kudankulan 2 unit was under construction for 13 years and is yet to be commissioned.
The NPCIL received an averaged tariff of Rs 2.50 per unit in 2014-15. Kudankulan 1-2 will receive Rs 3.95 per unit while Kudankulan 3-4 will need tariffs of Rs 6.30 per unit, assuming there are no more delays. Solar is already cheaper. Delays will cause cost inflation. Levelised costs at new plants like Mithivirdi (Bhavnagar, Gujarat) using US equipment, could be between Rs 9 a unit to over Rs 25 a unit, according to some estimates.
Meanwhile, the liability for accidents is capped at Rs 500 crore (about $75 million). There is also confusion about who is liable. The Nuclear Liability Act of 2010 targets equipment suppliers, not plant operators. This has stymied equipment suppliers. An insurance pool of some $220 million has been created to take care of liabilities. Regardless, the amount is peanuts. India is a recent signatory to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage. So, it will dole out standardised compensation to victims in an accident and hence, the government may have to pick up a very large tab.
The Chernobyl disaster of 1986 in the former USSR led to the evacuation of 2,600 square kilometres, an area that will remain uninhabitable for centuries. The death toll was more than 4,000, according to a United Nations study. Some deaths occurred from radiation poisoning; most were from the increased rate of cancer.
The Fukushima disaster has resulted in no direct fatalities so far. But more than 1,800 fatalities were registered from causes such as suicide among the 120,000 evacuees. The evacuation zone is now a 20-km radius (about 1,250 square km). Fukushima has already cost over $100 billion. Many of India's reactors are located near densely populated areas. Similar evacuations would mean moving millions.
The protests indicate a big trust deficit and that mistrust is the ground reality. It will be hard to build any trust without a paradigm shift in transparent information dissemination. But even if the AEC gets better at talking to the public, the focus on nuclear power deserves to be questioned on utilitarian grounds alone.
What advantage does nuclear offer compared to alternatives like renewables, which may be rolled out much faster and cheaper? And don't forget the Precautionary Principle.
The Long View is an occasional series that analyses different scenarios