|
|
|
|
|
By Raj Chengappa, Editor-in-Chief |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A CRUEL JOKE ON THE POOR On the record PROFILE
|
By Raj
Chengappa, Editor-in-Chief
uneasy lies the crown on the head of any atomic energy chief across the world after the Fukushima nuclear complex incident in Japan in March this year. Triggered by a combination of an earthquake and a tsunami that resulted in a partial meltdown of its reactor core, Fukushima is now regarded as among the world’s worst nuclear power incidents. Feeling the heat is the czar of India's nuclear energy establishment, Dr Srikumar Banerjee, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission and Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy.
In recent years India had signed a major nuclear deal with the US that enabled it to import nuclear fuel and technology ending an embargo that had lasted over three decades. India was poised to exponentially expand its nuclear power capacity by importing reactors from France, Russia and USA and also by building indigenous plants. But the Fukushima episode has not only forced India's nuclear establishment to review the safety of its existing nuclear power plants but also raised questions about the viability of its entire power programme. In an exclusive interview with Editor-in-Chief Raj Chengappa at the famed Bhabha Atomic Research Centre in Trombay, the AEC Chief Banerjee candidly discussed a range of vital issues confronting nuclear power in India and stoutly defended India's decision to go ahead with its rapid expansion. Excerpts: After the Fukushima nuclear complex incident in Japan in March this year in which its reactors suffered a dangerous meltdown under the combined impact of an earthquake and tsunami, there are valid concerns being raised about the safety of nuclear plants worldwide including those located in India. Just how safe are Indian nuclear reactors and what are the chances of a Fukushima happening here? As regards the nuclear safety record of India we have what we call 335 reactor years of experience. There has not been a single major incident. People say that the Narora event (in 1993) was the most serious. At Narora, there was a fire (in the non-nuclear turbine section) which was completely contained, and there was no radioactivity release. Now, 335 reactor years is not a short time. So our safety record has been impeccable. We did have a tsunami hit India's East coast in 2004 and strike the Kalpakkam nuclear reactor complex which is close to Chennai causing some damage. Yes the tsunami hit our Kalpakkam complex then and unfortunately 25 of our colleagues living in the colony nearby there died. But when it came up to the reactor complex, the reactor immediately shut down safely without any problems. And within three days we were back to full operation. Since then we have taken further safety precautions including constructing a structure that would act as a barrier or tsunami wall to prevent any chance of flooding. Apart from that there are also mini wave breakers. All these would ensure that the tsunami waves will be dissipated even before it reaches the complex. In 2001, there was a major earthquake in Bhuj measuring 6.9 in the Richter scale which was close to the Kakrapar reactor in Gujarat. What was the impact? It didn't have any impact. The reactor continued working without any difficulty. What are the chances of an earthquake that struck Fukushima happening in India and can our reactors with stand it? First of all, we live in a region that has a tectonically active area in the Himalayas. Very large scale earthquakes measuring 9 on the Richter scale as in Japan can happen. So the site selection process for our nuclear reactors takes a couple of years and is only done after a very thorough analysis of the geotectonic investigation to make sure these are located in areas that are not prone to major earthquakes. Also, we have recorded history that shows the number and magnitude of the earthquakes and what is their return probability. But those are only statistical figures and I do not trust those numbers. All our reactors are designed to withstand any seismic activity while they are being built. The maximum seismic activity in the zone has been taken into account and the plant has been designed to take the dynamic load that comes onto it when an earthquake happens and withstand the pressure. A Fukushima kind of incident happening here is almost impossible. After Fukushima, have you undertaken a safety review of the 20 reactors that India has and what are the results? In Fukushima, the problem was that while the nuclear reactors shut down after the quake and the tsunami, there was the residual decay heat from the nuclear fuel rods that needed to be evacuated. But the plant experienced a total power black-out with even the back-up generators failing. There was no energy available to pump in water to cool the rods. It was the hydrogen produced as a result of excessive heat that caused the explosions that blew the containment roofs apart. After Fukushima, we undertook a thorough review of our nuclear plants. One was done by the Nuclear Power Corporation, the other by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and the third by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) so that we could get expert opinion from different institutions and then implement the recommendations. How did these institutions go about evaluating
our existing reactors for safety? Each reactor was grouped into classes based on their technology. For the two boiling water reactors, as they are known, we formed a separate committee which came out with some specific recommendations. Some of these have already been implemented and others are waiting for the approval of the AERB. The remaining 18 reactors are pressurised heavy water reactors which also depending on the particular sort of vintage, we have grouped into three and have got committees to make specific recommendation for each of them. Those that could be implemented without any consultation have been done and the others we are waiting for clearance from the AERB. What were the major things that were done or are being done regarding safety? The focus was particularly on redundancy in power supply and augmenting water supply for cooling. In most reactors there is already a four-tier power supply as back up. But we have now also introduced mobile generator sets which can be brought to play immediately. We have taken or taking steps to have a larger inventory of water to take out the heat if needed. There is concern that there is no real independent nuclear safety regulatory authority with the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) currently reporting to the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). What has been done to address it? The Union government has already announced that there will be an independent nuclear regulatory authority. I am not saying that the AERB is not independent; it is independent. But the AERB is created by an executive order. Now it is important that it should get a statutory status. That it is formed by an Act of Parliament. The Prime Minister has announced that a new Act would be introduced in the forthcoming monsoon session to facilitate this. It is an important step because apart from the legal status it will be broadening its activity and can receive technical support from different organisations. We are working on the draft to ensure that it will be totally independent and will not report to the AEC but some institution outside its ambit. Its activities will be transparent. We have nothing to hide. Let it be out in the open. There is growing protest about locating the giant 1,650 MW nuclear reactor being built by a French consortium in Jaitapur in Maharastra. Many are saying that it is an untested reactor. What have you done to assuage the concerns being raised? There are few real scientific issues being raised. One is of it being an untested reactor. Today there is no European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) of the 1650 MW capacity running anywhere in the world. The answer to that is that this is a revolutionary design based on reactors running earlier with very good performance. There is one in France, one in Finland and two in China that are being constructed. Also countries like the UK are seriously considering purchasing EPR reactors. There are many more new safety features that went into its designing and it has qualified as a safe and efficient reactor which is expected to have a very high plant load factor. But there are worries about the site itself saying that Jaitapur is next to the sea coast and it is both vulnerable to tsunamis and earthquakes? Jaitapur is a really favourable site because though it is on the sea coast, it is 20 meters higher than the sea level. It is a kind of plateau. The seismicity in the area is put at level 3 compared to Fukushima which is in a level 5 zone. The chance of a tsunami striking the Western coast of India is rather low. The last time it happened was in 1946 and came from a fault near Karachi which is almost 900 kms away. It was rather feeble. We have had independent expert committees go into the safety and other aspects. Their reports are being examined and if there are any changes we would have it implemented after the AERB clears it. We will also make their report public. After the Fukushima incident, there is a perception that it is the beginning of the end of nuclear power in the world. Germany even announced that it was going to phase out all its reactors. What's the rationale for India not only continuing its programme but expanding it? Yes the sentiment that Fukushima spells the beginning of the end to nuclear power is being expressed. But the important issue is: Where is India going to get the energy it requires from? In Western Europe and America they average ½ to 1 per cent growth in their economy and so there is not much growth in energy requirement of these countries. Their population has stabilised. Also let me say that Germany had said they would phase out their nuclear plants almost 40 years ago but haven't done it so far. They can also import power from Eastern Europe which has plenty of nuclear plants. UK is seriously expanding their nuclear power capacity after North Sea oil production has dipped. Even Saudi Arabia is planning to set up nuclear plants. We don't have too many options. Against the Indian per capita consumption of 600 kilowatt hour (kWh), the world average is 2500 kWh including Africa. Many OECD countries have 8000-9000 kWh and the US is even higher. So what does that mean for India? Today 40 per cent of our homes don't have access to electricity and the quality of access is sketchy. It is a serious issue. Who will provide the energy? In terms of power production Indian will have to exploit all forms of energy to sustain the 8 to 10 per cent economic growth. By 2050 our coal reserves will almost be exhausted. Also, while now we contribute 5 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, if we rely on coal that would grow to almost 40 to 50 per cent of the world's CO2 emission. We will need to reduce our emissions. Apart from that the huge bill for importing coal to meet our needs could cripple our economy. Solar fuel is okay for distributed energy needs for villages and agriculture but cannot support a metropolitan grid requirement or for manufacturing industry. Let's not forget that manufacturing industry is shifting in a big way to China and India. If we want economic growth, we can't escape energy growth. We have absolutely no other option. What about cost of nuclear power? Isn't
it higher? There is no doubt that the nuclear capital cost per MW is currently higher than thermal or hydro-electric power. But the fuel cost for nuclear is low, the life of the plant is longer and taking into account all these things, the costs would come down considerably. If we take environmental and emission issues, that are also very important, into consideration, in terms of nuclear power plants, it has tremendous advantages. Another factor is rapid urbanisation. People are moving from rural areas to urban areas because there is no employment in rural areas. There is a power shortage of 15 per cent. So, power is being bought by some for Rs 10 and Rs 12 a unit. While nuclear power is between Rs 2.50 per unit, somewhat the same when compared to thermal. But will nuclear power assure India self-sufficiency in energy? Currently we have 20 reactors generating 5,000 MW which is around three per cent of our total. I am not saying that we are jumping 100 per cent onto nuclear power. We are going in stages. By 2020 we plan to generate 20,000 MW of power from nuclear reactors and by 2032 around 60,000 MW. Even then it will meet only 10 to 15 per cent of our total power needs. If we miss that opportunity, we will not be able to catch up. We will be a perennially energy importing country and if we do not improve upon it, the country will be lacking in self-sufficiency. But if we move down the nuclear power path and exploit our thorium reserves then in the latter half of the century nuclear power could provide the energy security we are looking for. We are in the process of importing a vast number of reactors from Russia, France and the US. With our indigenous uranium resources only able to support 10,000 MW of power how are we going to meet the additional requirements? Uranium is such a commodity that unless you have an assurance for supply you cannot build the nuclear reactors. So one of the key factors during negotiations with Russia, France and USA is that they are in a position to assure us fuel supply of uranium for the reactors that we buy. Meanwhile we are indigenously developing our fast breeder reactors that would generate more fuel than it consumes which would enable us to finally exploit our huge thorium reserves and give us self sufficiency in nuclear power. That is our overall plan. So far, how has the US nuclear deal helped in terms of India's power programme? So far what it has done is that it has enabled us to import some uranium. Now you may ask while we say that our technology is good why then do we need to import reactors from other countries? The answer is that if you want to have the kind of growth in energy supply needed, you cannot do that purely on the basis of indigenous capability because the Indian industry capacity is not there. There is a misconception that it is a deal with only the USA. It is not so. It's more an opening up of the nuclear commerce for India. Before the deal there was a total embargo. There was no technology, no material, no exchanges right from 1974. (After India's first nuclear explosion). Sometimes these countries used to say that you cannot get even a paper clip from us. We have suffered for 35 years in complete isolation. Now that isolation is broken by the nuclear pact without sacrificing our strategic programme. This was a major achievement of the nuclear deal. Does the deal also allow us to import enrichment and reprocessing technology from these countries? Strictly speaking there is a catch in that. In some of the bilateral documents, it is said that yes, we can get technology in all areas. But then there are some discussions and disputes going on in some countries about this. We are not very keen on cent per cent technology from the outside. Our own technology is there. But as it has been mentioned in some bilateral documents that we are enjoying a full-fledged technology partnership in all areas then why should we not be allowed to have it? But otherwise in terms of both for reprocessing and enrichment technology, India has its own and we can depend on our own. |
A CRUEL JOKE ON THE POOR Whether someone is poor or not would depend on the criteria we lay down for defining poverty. Therefore, let us examine these criteria, accepted by the Planning Commission and approved by the Union Cabinet, closely. “The income limit for house-holds for qualifying as a beneficiary under the BPL (Below Poverty Line) list has been pegged at about Rs.27,000/- per annum, according to the methodology approved by the Union Cabinet on the 19th May,” reports The Hindu of the 21st May. This means that a per capita income of Rs.14.80 (say, Rs.15) per day in a family of five would take you above the poverty line and thus, place you in the category of the “affluent” who would not require special schemes , support and subsidy from the state. To be fair to the Government, Rs.15 per day per person is the cut off point only for village dwellers. City dwellers would be regarded as being poor only if they spend less than Rs.19.3 (say, Rs.20) per day per person (Times of India, New Delhi, 11th May 2011, page 16). In fact, PC has even suggested how one may live comfortably in the above amounts ( see table). Let us look at these figures closely. The rates I am giving below are approximate, for the city I live in (Hyderabad) and for the cheapest, unadulterated, usable products in the open market from which a person will have to buy if he/she is above the poverty line. It is incredible that PC recommends an expenditure of just Rs. 467 per year per person on clothing. With this sum an Indian woman would not be able to buy even two sarees, two petticoats and two blouses whereas the minimum requirement for an Indian woman per year is three sarees, four blouses and two petticoats. The amount recommended by PC for education to put one above the poverty line would be, for two children, Rs.93 per month for a family of five. This would include fees, books, stationary, school bag and all other charges that the school may demand. This amount is a very small fraction of what the Government, it appears, will be willing to pay to private schools per poor child per month under the Right to Education Act. The allowance for footwear - Rs.72 per year per person - is just as unrealistic. Tell me a place from where I can get a footwear that will last me for five years, for Rs. 360. And remember, for children, you will need to buy a footwear every year. For entertainment, PC has made a provision of Rs. 6.6 per month per person, the cheapest movie ticket in Hyderabad costs Rs. 10 per person. Let us now look at what would be left - that is, about Rs.8 per person per day or Rs.1200 per month for a family of five - for other expenditure if you have just crossed the poverty line. A bus pass in Hyderabad for five for a whole month will cost Rs.2500. Milk is approximately Rs.29 per kg. Even if you give 300 g (as per NIN's recommendation) of milk per day, it will cost you Rs.522 per month. I leave it to the readers to judge what accommodation - just one room, kitchen and a bath of the lowest standard - would cost in a city like Hyderabad. And then, expenses on health, electricity and water would also have to be met out of the balance of Rs.1200 per month for the whole family; the minimum fee that a doctor charges in Hyderabad is Rs. 100 per visit. Further, where would the money come from for the minimum capital expenditure on say, kitchen utensils and furniture required for sleeping, studying and cooking? A small bedsheet will today cost a minimum of Rs.200. Seventy per cent of India still lives in the rural sector. According to PC, only 41.8% of those living in the rural sector would be considered poor; this would mean 29.26% of Indian population. Similarly, according to PC's norms, 25.7% of the Indian population that lives in urban areas would be below the poverty line. As 30% of India lives in such areas, this would mean that 7.71% of the Indian population in the urban sector would be considered below the poverty line. Thus, even for PC, India has 29.26% + 7.71%, that is 36.97% (say 37%) poor people which is much lower than far more sensitive and reliable estimates. Even 37% is a disgrace but what is worrying is that the Government would continue to decrease this figure by playing with numbers, instead of engaging in developmental activities judiciously coupled with various kind of assistance to enable those who are truly below the poverty line, become capable of pushing themselves progressively above the poverty line. It is a moot question as to why, instead of opening new Government hospitals and making the existing Government hospitals more viable and patient-friendly, or improving the lot of Government schools, the Government has decided to pay private hospitals and schools for taking care of poor people. The writer is Founder Director, Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology,Hyderabad and former Vice Chairman, National Knowledge Commission
|
|
On the record
The
minister of state for Parliamentary Affairs, Planning and Science and Technology, Ashwani Kumar has, of late, been on the forefront of defending the Government in the wake of its bitter standoff with the Anna Hazare-led civil society group over the drafting of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill. A Rajya Sabha member from Punjab and a lawyer-turned-minister, Kumar says the debate right now is not so much between the Government and the civil society as it is between means and ends. Excerpts from an interview: The Government and civil society members are on the verge of disengagement over the draft of the proposed Lokpal Bill. In such a scenario, can the nation hope for a purposeful Bill at all? In a parliamentary democracy, law making is possible only through the enlisting of popular support behind a proposed law. That's why the Government agreed to hold negotiations with the Anna Hazare team, only to face non-cooperation later. But we will bring before the Parliament a purposeful Lokpal Bill with or without the support of the self-proclaimed spokespersons of the people. Let's remember that permitting individuals to impose their will in deviation of established constitutional norms will pave the way for anarchy. But corruption is a huge issue. How can a debate around corruption possibly lead to anarchy? The Government has taken steps against those charged with the abuse of office. But history tells us that every time parliamentary institutions are undermined, the freedoms of citizens are subordinated to the overarching presence of the state. Even Dr B.R. Ambedkar had cautioned against the use of unconstitutional methods terming them as the “grammar of anarchy”. The choice before the people, therefore, is whether they want to strengthen democracy or walk the road that could lead to the inevitable return of the Leviathan. We should today be debating, for instance, whether the legal architecture being sought to be put in place in the form of the DNA Profiling Bill, the National Intelligence Grid and the UID Card could invade our right to privacy which is integral to the right to life with dignity. While you are convinced that the Lokpal Bill will be presented in the forthcoming session of the Parliament, do you think the Opposition will allow the Houses to run? It would be unfortunate if the biggest forum of democracy is again made dysfunctional. As many as 83 bills, including some against corruption, are pending in both the Houses for consideration and passing. If the lawmaking instrumentality of the Indian state is made redundant at the drop of a hat, our political stability could be endangered. The Indian Parliament is credited with having passed historic laws such as the Right to Education, the Right to Information and MNREGA. Anna Hazare and his supporters want a referendum to know what form of the Lokpal Bill the citizens want. What is the Government's take? It's a palpably untenable suggestion because even those uninformed in the workings of constitutional democracies would know that periodic elections in the country are no less than a referendum on issues of the day. The Government is repeatedly accusing the Anna camp of overstepping its brief. Is it getting a sense that engaging them, in the first place, was a blunder? The co-option of Hazare team in the Lokpal Bill Drafting Committee was indeed a concession to the civil society on the part of a responsive Government which walked an extra mile to ensure that those who were espousing the cause of the Bill had a full say during the negotiations. It was never anticipated that these representatives would seek to impose their will against the principles of the Constitution to derogate the parliamentary procedures of lawmaking. People are at great unease with the Government over the issue of corruption. What, in such a situation, are the biggest challenges before the country? The real challenge is to reinforce the value of idealism in politics. We need to summon the national mood and push it in a direction away from compulsive cynicism towards the celebration of national accomplishments like our involvement in the development of the longest 30-metre telescope in Hawai; our mastery over heavy water nuclear reactor technology and our projected 2 trillion dollar economy by 2020. We also need to civilise ourselves in the use of power and not permit sub-nationalism to destroy the edifice of our pluralist society. If the vessel is small, it cannot be used to hold what is large.
|
|
PROFILE Since 1990, when he first climbed Mt Everest, the incredible mountaineer has repeated the feat every year barring three. He did not climb in 1996 because he was ordered by his wife to supervise construction of their lodge. In 2006 he moved to Salt Lake City, Utah ( United States of America ) and settled down for good so that his children could get better education. In 2001 because he was too ill to go for it. It's of course a world record, a record unlikely to be broken for a long time. While admiring mountaineers have paid him the ultimate compliment by saying that Apa can climb the Everest blindfolded, the down-to-earth Sherpa makes no bones about mountaineering being just a job for him. It is not adventure but the need to provide for his family that prompted him to start guiding and helping expeditions. No, he would not like his children to follow him. It is too risky, he says and underscores the need for the children to get proper education, something that he was deprived of. He lost his father at the age of 12, was forced to drop out of school and worked as a porter and kitchen boy to survive. The 'Super Sherpa's” climbing career began relatively late in 1985 when he was already 24 years old. In the USA, however, he has come into his own. A motivational speaker , increasingly being sought by schools and corporations alike, the simple Sherpa moves his audience with his stories of hardship and humility. The stories also seek to convey values of working hard, taking risks, facing odds with courage and do whatever it takes to complete the job at hand. A mountaineer, while commenting on him, exclaimed that Apa's 'bedside manner' while consoling or comforting sick or disappointed mountaineers would be “all business, no sugar-coating and no crying or whining”. The down-to-earth mountaineer, also outspoken, does not mince his words in voicing his disappointment at the Nepal government not doing enough for either Sherpas or those like him who set examples for others. Mountaineers from other countries, he points out, receive honours, felicitations, sponsorships and monetary rewards on their reward. But in Nepal, and in neighbouring India as well, there is little appreciation for the risks mountaineers take and their heroic deeds. He has set out to undo some of the wrong by forming the Apa Sherpa Foundation, which has raised money to set up schools in Nepal for the children of Sherpas. He also hopes to write his memoirs now that he has hung his boots. He was ready to retire in 2007 but was persuaded to lead the Eco Everest Expeditions, which seek to clean up the mountain. The expeditions have been bringing down to the Base Camp garbage, debris and waste like water bottles and oxygen cylingers left behind by earlier expeditions. They have also recovered the wreckage of a helicopter and dead bodies. At the same time, the expeditions increasingly promote alternative energy solutions like parabolic solar cooker, solar lighting and portable toilets. Most of Apa's photographs show him grinning and his acquaintances vouch for his sense of humour and practical, common sense. Once when Apa, christened Lhapka Tenzing at birth, was forced to miss a Puja because he had attend to a sick climber, the latter was apologetic and voiced his regret. But a laconic Apa replied with a smile, “Don't worry. I have done so many Pujas that I am full of good luck”. Since 1953, when Tenzing Norgay and Sir Edmund Hillary first climbed Mount Everest, more than 5,000 people have followed them to the peak. Over 250 have also died, either on their way up or while coming down. But few has left such an imprint as Apa, who is truly a living legend..
|
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | E-mail | |
