No doubt Nuclear Power has high perceived threat but low actual threat if Safety systems re adopted.The unfortunate thing in India is that we are growing at great pace but Safety systems are still in nascent stage.It is high time that these Power Plants have low water consumption,can be built in smll space,they are clean but Safety Systems are to be of highest order.Now when Indi hs not been inducted s NSG Partner it is very important tht the Policy of building NPP is reviewed let it becomes defunct investment RS Yadav
Re: Nuclear Plants.
by a m on Feb 06, 2016 02:44 PM
Nuclear power is not an avoidable option for India.
Renewable energy has basic defects like extremely high vulnerability to military action and sabotage, extremely low intensity per unit area, and extremely high weather and climate dependence, to be a reliable source of main power for extremely industrialized economy that India needs.
The only major defect of nuclear power is its extreme vulnerability to spread of terror after nuclear accidents. This issue is possible to solve by better study of physics and engineering and better study of psychology of interest groups.
Fear after Fukushima is genuine but the terror is motivated by interested groups. Negligence in keeping the generators well maintained and unsafe design for Tsunamis were the causes of the accident, both of which were preventable.
Strategic solution is to keep details of nuclear power projects open to public, and to create an associated body for study of each project by private citizens.
Wholesale condemnation or support of nuclear power is illogical. It is only possible because of opaqueness of Indian politics and administration, detached and ignorant general population of India, and loss of idealism as the guiding principle of Indian policy.
More people have died and will continued to die in India due to the slow progress of nuclear power generation, than because of probable accidents.
The author says \"Firstly, the per MW capital cost of even the cheapest nuclear plant is about 5 to 8 times the cost of coal power plants or hydro power stations\" in his conclusion.He being the former chief of AERB his lack of knowledge about capital cost of nuclear is understandable. What is surprising equal ignorance about coal or hydro plant cost even after being a boss at BHEL.
This is from a former chief of the AERB. Why did he not come out with this opinion when he was in power ? We see such thing too often now-a-days. People keep shut when in power and reveal amazing stories when they are no longer in power, like the ex-general V.K.Singh.
The author only talks about the Capital cost of the Nuclear Plant (even this will be less when its an indigenous design & build). Nuclear power is highly cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels (In India its Coal which is also being restricted due to the Global warming concerns). In assessing the economics of nuclear power, decommissioning and waste disposal costs are fully taken into account and Former AERB BOSS must stop fooling others with his propaganda without objective evidence.
A very informative piece by a person who was at the top of our nuclear power structure.Would be interesting to know from someone like him what exactly is delaying the 500 MW PFBR at Kalpakkam. This plant has been given finish dates starting from 2010 onwards and every year we hear of a new commissioning date ! And it's 2016 now, with no end in sight !
