45
Nuclear safety… The myth and the reality

Nuclear safety

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Nuclear safety

Nuclear safety…

The myth and the reality

Page 2: Nuclear safety

An energy often touted to be absolutely safe….

Atomic power station Kaiga

Page 3: Nuclear safety

Bihar Uttar Pradesh Jharkhand Odisha Madhya Pradesh West Bengal0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Households Electrified (in %)

Households Electrified (in %)

Households electrified

Page 4: Nuclear safety

Bihar Uttar Pradesh Jharkhand Odisha Madhya Pradesh West Bengal88

90

92

94

96

98

100

102

Villages Electrified (in %)

Villages Electrified (in %)

Villages electrified

Page 5: Nuclear safety

Why not?

Cost of connection

Monthly expenses

Unsuitable supply

Lack of awareness

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Homes in Madhya Pradesh

Homes in Madhya Pradesh

Page 6: Nuclear safety

Households that do not pay the bill

Bihar Jharkhand Madhya Pradesh Odisha Uttar Pradesh West Bengal0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

% of households that do not pay their bills

Page 7: Nuclear safety
Page 8: Nuclear safety

India has vaulting nuclear

ambitions…

Page 9: Nuclear safety

…from the present 5000MWe to

20,000MWe by 2020

Page 10: Nuclear safety

Nuclear chain

reaction

Page 11: Nuclear safety

Nagasaki 1945 Aug

9th

Page 12: Nuclear safety

Controlled fission

Page 13: Nuclear safety
Page 14: Nuclear safety

….The Chicago

Pile1942

The first ever……..

Page 15: Nuclear safety

Three mile island,

Pennsylvania – a watershed

event

March 28 1979

Page 16: Nuclear safety

Light water reactor

Page 17: Nuclear safety

What went wrong?”

A combination of personnel error, design deficiencies, and component failures

Page 18: Nuclear safety

Chernobyl – a manmade catastrophe of epic proportions

26th April 1986

Page 19: Nuclear safety
Page 20: Nuclear safety

A test that went terribly wrong.

A combination of design and human errors

Page 21: Nuclear safety

Forty one deaths due to fire and radiation.

Four thousand cancer deaths.

Page 22: Nuclear safety
Page 23: Nuclear safety

The aftermath

Untold miseries

Unending

sorrowsInnocent victims

Page 24: Nuclear safety

Fukushima

11th March 2011

Page 25: Nuclear safety
Page 26: Nuclear safety

Tsunami submerged the sea water pump and the

core heated up.

Page 27: Nuclear safety

1 rad = 0.01 J/Kg

Page 28: Nuclear safety

INDIAN SCENARIO

Page 29: Nuclear safety
Page 30: Nuclear safety

koodamkulamVVER - 1000

Page 31: Nuclear safety

23rd June 2012

• Tritium leak in RAPS.• Given a 30-minute permit, worked

there for five hours instead. • Told to drink lots of water and cool

drinks. 

Page 32: Nuclear safety

April 2011

• Fire alarms blare in the control room of the Kaiga Generating Station in Karnataka.

•  Comments by officials alternately say there was fire, that there was only smoke and no fire, and that the fire was not in a sensitive area

Page 33: Nuclear safety

November 2009

• Fifty-five employees consume radioactive material after tritiated water finds its way into the drinking water cooler in Kaiga

• “Somebody deliberately put the tritiated water vials into a drinking water cooler” – Anil Kakodkar, chairman AEC

Page 34: Nuclear safety

January 1992

• Four tons of heavy water spilt at RAPS

Page 35: Nuclear safety

December 1991

• A leak from pipelines in the vicinity of CIRUS and Dhruva research reactors at the BARC.

• Results in severe Cs-137 soil contamination. Local vegetation was also found to be contaminated

• Contract workers digging to the leaking pipeline were reportedly not tested. They could not be traced.

Page 36: Nuclear safety

July 1991

• A contracted labourer mistakenly paints the walls of RAPS with heavy water before applying a coat of whitewash.

• He also washed his paintbrush, face and hands in the deuterated and tritiated water, and has not been traced since.

Page 37: Nuclear safety

Problems plaguing Indian scenario

• From 1991 to 2011 more than 16 incidences

• Many go unreported• Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) has

ranked India 23rd out of 25 countries• Atomic Energy Regulatory Board

(AERB) is not an autonomous body as it depends on the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) for all practical purposes being subordinate to it .

• The AERB is also grossly understaffed.

Page 38: Nuclear safety

• The secretary of DAE is the ex–officio chairman of the AEC (from Dr.Homi Bhabha to Dr. Sekhar Basu)

• The Atomic Energy Act of 1962. Under the provisions of the act, the government is permitted to deny information to citizens requesting details of nuclear power

• Nuclear safety regulatory authority bill 2011lapsed

Page 39: Nuclear safety

It indemnifies the suppliers of the liability to pay unless the defect is the result of

willful negligence. How to prove the mens rea

is the million dollar question.

Nuclear (non) liability act

Page 40: Nuclear safety

• Effectively caps the maximum amount of liability in case of each nuclear accident at 1500 crores to be paid by the operator (NPC)

• Clause 17- Victims will not be able to sue anyone. Only operators can.

• Clause 18- of the nuclear liability bill limits the time to make a claim within 10 years

• Clause 35- The operator or the responsible persons in case of a nuclear accident will undergo the trial under Nuclear Damage Claims Commissions and no civil court is given the authority. 

Stooping

to conquer

Page 41: Nuclear safety
Page 42: Nuclear safety

Safety measures

Page 43: Nuclear safety

FROM THE SEATTLE CHIEF’S LETTER TO PRESIDENT

FRANKLIN……. • …This we know: the earth does not

belong to man, man belongs to the earth. All things are connected like the blood that unites us all. Man did not weave the web of life; he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.

Page 44: Nuclear safety

Better be safe than

sorry

Page 45: Nuclear safety

Thanks