Indian Nuclear Society
Quarterly Newsletter
(Vol.9, NO. 2, April-June, 2012)


Japan has seen large scale destruction caused by nuclear weapons attack as well as intense public trauma as a result of the severe accident at Fukushima reactors. There is therefore a deep sensitivity among Japanese people regarding nuclear matters. It is remarkable that Japan became a leader in nuclear power technology and made nuclear energy a key ingredient of its energy security architecture after suffering Hiroshima and Nagasaki destruction. Discipline of Japanese people in orderly response to tsunami and the reactor accident has been exemplary. To me even more remarkable has been the decision to restart Ohi-3 & 4 nuclear units in the aftermath of such high impact nuclear disaster and very bold and frank report of independent Parliamentary Accident Investigation Committee identifying the root cause of Fukushima accident as a “Made in Japan” crisis caused by the “ingrained conventions of Japanese culture”. What exactly will be the long term view with respect to role of nuclear energy in Japan is something that will unfold with time. Thing that is clear today is that Japan will not remain perpetually trapped in 'oppose everything debate' and move forward to secure its future needs.

Fukushima clearly has had a global impact. In depth reviews have been carried out world over looking at global as well as country specific situation. Several generic as well as plant specific lessons/safety improvements have been identified. Actions at global, national and nuclear power plant level have been taken or are contemplated.

Barring exceptions of few countries like Germany, most countries are now back on the path of implementation of their respective nuclear power programmes. New constructions have been approved or are about to be approved in several countries notably US, UAE, UK, RUSSIA, CHINA and others. Issues of sustainability as well as threat of climate change are clearly important factors. Even more important perhaps is the improved competitiveness of nuclear power on account of rising fossil energy prices.

Safety would however remain paramount. Trauma caused in public domain during a severe accident primarily as a result of large scale displacement of people in the neighbourhood is a factor that needs better solutions. Nuclear reactor designs must evolve to preclude the necessity to relocate large mass of people even in a most severe accident. Further the damage to reactor in a severe accident should be restorable in a reasonable time of say not more than a few years. We must progressively move towards this goal. Our own AHWR is an exercise in this direction.

I think, time has also come to become more realistic in terms of intervention levels for deciding public evacuation in case of a severe accident. While conservatism to the maximum practical extent is desirable under normal conditions, the experience at Chernobyl and now at Fukushima has shown that high level of conservatism in management of large scale evacuation leads to excessive public trauma with attendant harm unrelated to nuclear radiation exposure. There is now a stronger body of evidence that the LNT hypothesis may not be valid and prevalent practice of large scale evacuation based on a lower intervention level could well be leading to sub-optimal safety from an overall consideration. US Health Physics Association has already come out with a quantitative recommendation for permissible public exposure in this regard.

Having said that, we should also recognise that safety standard of our reactors as indeed several advanced systems world over remains very good and we must continue to contribute to supply of carbon-di-oxide free, safe nuclear electricity even as we further evolve towards new paradigms of higher levels of safety.

Specifically in India, we have to recognise that our need for additional electricity generation capacity to reach a reasonable quality of life for our people, is the largest as compared to any other country, even China. This in an era of depleting earth resources and de-emphasis of fossil energy is a challenge of unprecedented dimensions and we must leverage all our capabilities to meet this challenge squarely.

Fortunately, we now have access to larger Uranium supply potential both from within the country and outside, our industry is eagerly awaiting to play a larger role in the supply chain for nuclear power plants based on both of domestic as well as foreign technology and in competitive terms nuclear power should be better placed given the domestic coal supply constraints and higher price of coal in international market.

We must continue our thrust in rapidly expanding Fast Reactors and attendant fuel cycle capacities as well as introduction of AHWR. This is crucial to our ability to go beyond Uranium potential considering our vast energy needs.

We however need better engagement with people particularly in the neighbourhood of our present and future plants. Our conviction that nuclear power is for welfare of our people needs to be carried to them and shared by them."