PMANE Expert Committee Report Dec 2011

REPORT OF THE
PEOPLESMOVEMENTAGAINSTNUCLEARENERGY (PMANE)EXPERTCOMMITTEE
ON
SAFETY,FEASIBILITYANDALTERNATIVESTO KUDANKULAMNUCLEARPOWERPLANT(KKNPP)
12th December 2011
ExecutiveSummary
The Committee appointed by the Peoples Movement Against Nuclear Energy studied various reports, documentsandpapersonKKNPPinparticularandnuclearenergyandionizingradiationingeneral.A38page reportbytheCentralExpertGroup(CEG)wasmadeavailabletous.Besidesrespondingtotheassertionsofthe CEGreport,wearealsobringingforwardourownstudiesthatarerelevanttothereactorsafety..Mostofthe documents that were asked by PMANE were not shared to the technical committee including the site evaluationstudyandotherdocuments.Despitethishandicapthecommitteehasgoneindepthandanalysed variousissues.
Thiscompilationisdividedintofourparts.
Part I deals with the sitespecific problems of KKNPP. These includes (i) a review of geological and oceanographicstudiesinaroundKKNPP,(ii)inadequateprovisionoffreshwaterinthenuclearislandandthe township,(iii)limestoneminingatthenuclearsite,(iv)constructionofatownshipfortsunamisurvivorswithin thesterilizedzonewhichapparentlyescapedtheattentionofNPCIL,(v)contradictionsandfalsestatementsby severalexpertgroupsthathavestudiedthenuclearfacilitiesduring2011and(vi)possibilityofstationblackout beyondamonthduetospaceweatheranomalies.
PartIIdealswiththehumanhealthconcernsoflowlevelradiation.Thisisbasedonepidemiologicalstudies conducted among the (i) bomb victims of HiroshimaNagasaki, (ii) downwinders of Madras Atomic Power Station(MAPS),(iii)workersofnuclearfacilitiesandtheirfamiliesinIndiaand(iv)peoplelivinginhighnatural backgroundradiationinKerala.
PartIII is an indepth studyofthe effectsofreleasesofradioactivityand 700 billionlitersof hotwater from eachreactoreverydayonthemarineecosystem.Theimpactsincludedepletionoffisheriesandmultiplication of heattolerant organisms like jelly fish. The depletion of fisheries will negatively impact the livelihood of fisherpeople and the food sovereignty of the people in general. Jelly fish attack can be a problem for the intakepipesforreactorcoolantandrawwaterfordesalinationplants.
Part IV deals with other safe and sustainable alternatives for electricity generation and contains a detailed analysis of fuel shifting. In short, the infrastructure built with so much of investment will not have to be abandoned.
PART1:KKNPPSPECIFICSAFETYRELATEDISSUES
1.1)GeologyandOceanography
Kudankulamsiteistransectedbysubvolcanicintrusivecuttingintothegranulitegradeofmetamorphicrocks. The configuration of these sub volcanic intrusive, brought out by a recent ground magnetic survey, deems a horstgrabenstructurecrisscrossingtheEWtrendofthecoast.Thesesubvolcanicbodieshavebisectedthe nearsurfacecrust inthe formofplugs to thewestand inthe formofdykeswarms to theeast, indicatinga severecrustaldilationtotheeast.Itisalsosuggestedthatcrustalthinningandmantleupwellinghaveledto theemplacementofmantlehybridrocksasdykesandplugs,near(200metersdeep)subsurface.
Places around Kudankulam have experienced small volume volcanic eruptions in the years 1998, 1999, 2001 and2005.Thenearesteruptionoccurredatjust26kilometersawayfromtheKKNPPsite.Theproductsofthese eruptionshavebeenconfirmedbyvariousresearchersastheonesproducedbyvolcanicactivity.Onecannot ruleoutsucheruptionsatthesiteitself.Issuesofsubduction,fireandimpactofhighspeedmissilesemanating fromtheburstneedtobeaddressed.
VariousresearchershavefoundunderseavolcanoesandvolcanoventsintheGulfofMannar(GoM)eversince 1975.Kudankulamsiteislocatedatabout100kilometersfromthesestructures.Amagneticsurveyconducted in the GoM in the year 1994 had revealed extensive emplacement of its crust by basltic rocks, eventually makingthecrustjust15kilometersthin.A1978studybythevolcanologistP.Hedervariplacesthissiteasone thatbelongstotheIndoAustralianseismiczone.
Thepresenceofdykesoftrachytes,alkalibasalts,sovites,phlogopitecarbonatiticbrecciasandlavas,floatsof volcanic bombs, ash tuffs and brecchias in Kudankulam site bring to the mind the case of High Radioactive WasteRepositoryattheYuccaMountain,Nevada,USA,whichhasbeenputoncoldstorageaftertwodecades ofresearch.
The presence of slumps in Gulf of Mannar puts forward the possibility of submarine landslides causing near fieldmegatsunamis.PresenceofsillholesatPannayarkulam,10kmawayfromKudankulamindicatesthatthis regionmightbeakarstregion.
These observations necessitate the need of volcanic hazards, karst hazard and tsunamihazard studies of the Kudankulamsitebeforethereactorgetscommissioned.
Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee
1.2)WaterReservesandAvailabilityatKKNPP
The safety of the reactor core with spent fuel inside and the spent fuel pool depends ultimately on the availabilityoffreshwater.ThousandoddemployeesandtheirfamilieslivinginAnuvijayNagarTownshipalso requirepotablewater.ThepotablewaterrequirementofKKNPPis1272cubicmeteraday.Thetworeactors require 6000 cub meters of water while operating and 1000 cubic meters while shut down. A year after commissioning, the spent fuel pools will also need water. Three desalination plants can produce the daily requirementoftworeactorsandtheTownship.Onedesalinationplantwillbeonstandby.Thereservewater availableatKKNPPcampusare(a)domesticsupply1425cubicmeters(b)Firewater2000cubicmetersand otherindustrialuses8020cubicmeters.
ThePostFukushimataskforceandtheExpertCommitteedidnotconsiderbreakdownofthedesalinationplant. Thedesalinationplantscanfaileitherduetogridfailureorduetodamageofthemachinesorduetoanattack fromthejellyfishandothermarineorganisms.Inthecaseofgridfailure,thereactorswillalsobeshutdown. Thereservewaterissufficientformaintainingthesafetyfeaturefor10days.However,thetownshipwillface watershortageinabouttwothreedays.Wherewilltheybringpotablewaterifthegridfailurelastsformore thanthreedays?Ifthedesalinationplantsfailduetootherreasons,thereactorswillhavetobeshutdown immediately.Restartingmaybedelayedduetoxenonpoisoning.
AERBhadplacedseveralconditionsonthequestionoffreshwater.Noneoftheseconditionsliketwophysically protected pipelines connected to Pechiparai and Upper Kodayar reservoirs, storage of 60,000 cub meter of waterinsidetheislandetc.Noneoftheseconditionshasbeenmet.(Chapter2FreshWaterAvailability)
1.3)LimestoneMiningintheExclusionZone
During 19992003, the India Cement Co was engaged in limestone mining at the KKNPP site. There is no mention of this additional industrial activity at the site in any of the documents of NPCIL. Even though this activitywashappeningevenwhileNEERIwasdoingitssitestudiesfortheEnvironmentalImpactAssessment, there is no mention of it in the EIA for KKNPP 1 and 2. They have meticulously documented the details of mining happening at a distance of 5 and 18 km from the site. Were these activities in accordance with the regulationsonthecoast?Whatwastheneedforthismininglease?Moredetailsinchapter3.
1.4)TheuncountedpeopleintheSterilizationzoneandRoutinereleasesthroughstack
The expert committee says that nobody lives within 2 km of the plant boundary. The CASANagar tsunami townshiplieswithinaboutakmfromtheboundary.Thereareabout2000peoplelivingin450housesinCASA Nagar.Accordingtotherules,thereshouldbenounnaturalpopulationgrowthinsidethesterilizationzone. The township could have been constructed elsewhere, outside the sterilization zone. This could have preventedunnecessaryexposureofchildrenandwomenfromstackemission.(Annualemissionfromstackswill bemorethan30trillionBqofxenon,14carbon,tritiumandotherradionuclides.)Inthecaseofaradiological emergency,thesearethepeoplewhowouldneedtobeevacuatedimmediately.WhyKKNPPdidnotseethem tillnow?(Chapter4)
1.5)FlawedassumptionsandfalseassurancesofsafetybytheExpertCommittees
ThereportsofthePostFukushimataskforces,AERBandtheExpertGroupoftheCentralgovernmentcontaina couple of faked data, flawed assumptions and false assurances. This chapter is a comparison of the reports dealingwiththesafetyofKKNPPreactors.(Chapter5)
1.6)StationBlackOutbeyond10daysduetoSpaceWeatherAnomalies
SpaceweatherscientistsandelectricityplannersinUSandothercountriesarepreparingforgridfailureslasting foryearsasaresultofsolartsunamis.AccordingtotheOakRidgeNationalLaboratory,theprobabilityofan eventsimilartothe1859CarringtonEventisoneinhundredyears.USNRCiscurrentlyconsideringapetition forrulemakingtoprotectthenuclearassetslikethereactorsandthespentfuelpoolintheeventofstation blackoutsanddesertionofthenuclearcampuses.(Chapter6SpaceWeatherAnomaliesandNuclearSafety)
PARTII:HEALTHSTUDIESSOMATICANDGENETICEFFECTS
Healtheffectsfromionizingradiationcanbebroadlyclassifiedintosomaticandgeneticeffects.
2.1)GeneticeffectsKeralaHighBackgroundradiationregion
People living in coastal regions of NeendakaraChavaraAlapat Panchayats in Kollam district of Kerala are exposed to higher natural radiation emanating from the monazite deposit in the beach sand. The mean exposuretoabout40,000peopleis5mSv(range2to15mSv).NKochupillaietalreportedahigherprevalence of Down Syndrome and Severe Mental Retardation in this region in 1975. A more detailed epidemiological studyon38,000exposedpeopleand32,000peoplelivinginnormalareasinAlapuzhadistrictwasconducted byVTPadmanabhanet.al.Thisstudyfoundastatisticallysignificantexcessofseveralsinglegeneanomaliesin thechildrenborninhighradiationareas.
2.2)FlawedGeneticStudiesintheBombedCitiesofJapan.
GeneticstudiesinHiroshimaNagasakiweredesignedbytheUSArmysAtomicBombCasualtyCommissionin 1948. They included a group exposed to heavy doses of residual radiation from the fission products and neutron activation products in the control (unexposed) group in the genetic study. A review shows high aberrationofsexratiooftheoffspringoftheunexposedcontrolgroup.Summaryofapaperpresentedatan internationalconferenceonradiationhealthrisks.
2.3)SexratioaberrationinChildrenofemployeesofBARCandTAPS
There were more boys among the progenies of employees of BARC and radiation workers of TAPS. The differenceinbirthsexratiofoundinthesepopulationswascomparedwiththenormalbirthsexratioinurban Maharashtra,Thedifferencewasstatisticallysignificant.Sexratioofaberrationofsimilarnaturehasalsobeen reportedinchildrenofSellafieldworkersandinprogeniesofatomicbombsurvivors.
2.2)SomaticEffectsPrevalenceofcanceramongatomicworkersandtheirwives
Prevalence of cancer was significantly higher among the workers and their wives of TAPS and BARC when comparedwithMAPS.Thismaybebecauseofthehigherexposurefromfirstgenerationreactorsandhigher maximumpermissibledosesduringthesixtiesandtheseventies.TheChennaicancerregistryreportshigher incidence of cancer than the registry in Mumbai. Prevalence of cancer among the male workers of BARC is threeandahalftimeshigherthanthatinMAPSworkers.Parallelincreaseisseeninthecaseofwivesaswell. TAPSstandsinbetween.
AlltheabovestudiesaresummarizedinChapter7.
2.5 Somatic Effects Autoimmune diseases, cancer etc among the Downwinders of MAPS, Kalpakkam
DrManjulaDattacomparedthehealthstatusofpeoplelivingwithin8kmofMadrasAtomicPowerStationwith thoseliving50peopleawayfromMAPS.Therawresultsofthisstudy,fundedbytheDepartmentofAtomic EnergywerereleasedbythemanagersofMAPS.For10diseasesincludingdiabetes,thyroidanomalies,cancer, mentalretardation,infertilityetc,theprevalenceper10,000peopleinproximateareaswas79asagainst19.5 inthedistantareas.Astudyofasmallerpopulationlivinginvillageslocatedat6km,40kmand500kmfrom MAPSconductedbyVPugazhendietalalsohadfoundsignificantexcessesofgoiterandautoimmunethyroid diseases among the people living in 40 km and 6 km from MAPS. Details Datta et al and Pugazhendi et al studiesaresummarizedinchapter7.
PARTIII:EFFECTSONMARINEBIOLOGY
Itisstatedthatthereactorswehaveanegativeimpactonthefisheries.Itmaybementionedthatthefishery resourcesofCaspianseaandtheBlackseaisdepletedbecauseoftheeffluencefromthereactorsandindustrial waste.Thereleaseofradiatedwasteintotheseacannotberuledout.
PART IV: SAFER
AND
SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVES AND FUEL SWITCHING AND
FAILUREOFINDIANNUCLEARPROGRAM
Thealternatives,costandthefailureofIndianNuclearEnergyisdetailsinthissection
CHAPTER - 1
VOLCANISM, TSUNAMI, KARST AND SHORE STABILITY

RRamesh,VTPadmanabhanandVPugazhendi
We have undertaken a critical review of the KKNPP site. We have used research papers from peer reviewed journals, international and national nuclear safety manuals (IAEA, USNRC and AERB), published books on various specific topics, and reports of recent natural events for conducting this in depth review. The review coversthefieldsofGeology,OceanographyandHydrology.
Thereviewindicatesthatthisisonesitethatshouldhavebeenselectedwithmuchcaution.Thereviewnotes thatthesiteselectionandevaluationbytheconcernedauthoritieswasnotdonewithduediligence.
Thesitehasthecharacteristicsofariftoranaulacogen.Presenceofcloselyassociatedcarbonatitesandbasic dykeswarms,escarpmentalongthecoastandthedrainagepatternsubstantiatethisconclusion.Theterrainis transectedbymaficbodiescuttingintothegranulitegradeofmetamorphicrocks.Theconfigurationofthese subvolcanicintrusives,broughtoutbyarecentgroundmagneticsurvey,deemsahorstgrabenstructurecriss crossingtheEWtrendofthecoast.Thesesubvolcanicbodieshavebisectedthenearsurfacecrustintheform ofplugstothewestandintheformofdykeswarmstotheeast,indicatingaseverecrustaldilationtotheeast. Theyaresuggestedasthesurfaceexpressionsofananomalousbodyfoundatadepthof110200meters.Itis alsosuggestedthatcrustalthinningandmantleupwellinghaveledtotheemplacementofmantlehybridrocks asdykesandplugs,near(200metersdeep)subsurface.Thefindingin2007,thatNagarcoillocated29kmfrom theKudankulamsitehasthehighestsubcrustalheatflowvalueinSouthIndiasupportsthisconclusion.A1991 study has found and analysed a volcanic trchytic tuff collected from the same spot where the two reactor buildingsarenowlocated.Thepresenceofdykesoftrachytes,alkalibasalts,sovites,phlogopitecarbonatitic breccias and lavas, floats of volcanic bombs, ash tuffs and brecchias bring to the mind the case of High RadioactiveWasteRepositoryattheYuccaMountain,Nevada,USA.Theprimaryargumentagainstsitingahigh levelradioactivewasterepositoryattheYuccaMountainRegion(YMR)wascenteredonthepossibilityofsmall volumebasalticvolcanismintheregion.ThepresenceofbasalticdykesintheYMR,hadmadetheUSNRCto conductmorethanoneVolcanicHazardStudyforthehighlevelradioactivewasterepository.
Places around Kudankulam have experienced small volume volcanic eruptions in the years 1998, 1999, 2001 and2005.Thenearesteruptionoccurredatjust26kilometersawayfromtheKKNPPsite.Theproductsofthese eruptionshavebeenconfirmedbyvariousresearchersastheonesproducedbyvolcanicactivity.Onecannot ruleoutsucheruptionsatthesiteitself.Issuesofsubduction,fireandimpactofhighspeedmissilesemanating fromtheburstneedtobeaddressed.
VariousresearchershavefoundunderseavolcanoesandvolcanoventsintheGulfofMannar(GoM)eversince 1975.Kudankulamsiteislocatedatabout100kilometersfromthesestructures.Amagneticsurveyconducted in the GoM in the year 1994 had revealed extensive emplacement of its crust by basltic rocks, eventually makingthecrustjust15kilometersthin.A1978studybythevolcanologistP.Hedervariplacesthissiteasone thatbelongstotheIndoAustralianseismiczone.
TheIAEAsafetydocumenttitledVolcanicHazardsinSiteEvaluationforNuclearInstallationsreleasedinMay 2011revealsthepossibledangersofhavingsubvolcanicinrusivesatasitefornuclearfacilities:
Volcanic activity or igneous intrusions, such as dykes, may change groundwater flow patterns and cause fluctuationsinthedepthofthewatertable.Magmaintrusionsalsocantriggerexplosionsinthehydrothermal system. Changes in the groundwater system may cause subsidence in karst terrains. (p75, DS405 Draft 10 20101209)
Allthesefindingspointtoonething:thenecessitytohaveavolcanichazardanalysisfortheKudankuulamsite beforethereactorsarecommissioned.
Thesiteselectionandevaluationcommitteeshaveignoredthepresenceofthesubvolcanicintrusivesandthe possibilityofhavingsmallvolumevolcaniceruptionsatthesiteitself.Thisnegligencemightprovecostlyinthe future.
The formation of a sill hole at Pannayarkulam after the rain on 26 November2011, and the occurrence of a similarincidencethreeyearsagoatRadhapuramsuggestthatthisareamightbeakarstregion.Pannayarkulam and Radhapuram are just 10 kilometers away from the reactor site. Extensive studies to understand these events should have been undertaken by NPCIL, but it remains unaware of these events. Commissioning the reactorswithoutunderstandingtheseeventsmighthavedisastrousconsequences.
The clearance for excavation was given in October, 2001. The clearance was issued subject to compliance of stipulationslikerestrictiononsurfaceminingoflimestonewithinExclusionZoneandSterilizedZoneanddesign ofembankmentforwaterstoragereservoirasultimateheatsink.Boththesestipulationshavenotbeenmetby
theNPCILtilltoday.HadtheNPCILknownthatthecrustoverwhichKKNPPislocatedisathinnedoutoneby the subvolcanic intrusions, and that this region has the ability to turn into a karst region, it would not have allowedtheminingactivityinthisareaatall.Lackofthisknowledgehaspromptedittoremainnegligent.
TherearestudiesthatindicatethattheKudankulamsitehasanunstableshoreline.StudiesbyBrucknur,Altrin ArmstrongSamandothershaveprovedthatthisshorehadremainedunstableingeologicalpast.Thecaseof the subsidence South Dhanushkodi, a town that was located in the same Gulf of Mannar coast, in the year 19481949becauseoffaulting,shouldhavecautionedNPCILabouttheissuesitmighthavetofaceifthissiteis chosen. However, ignorance of this most important geological event has made NPCIL to choose the Kudankulam site and locate the reactor buildings within 300 meters of the shoreline. Despite taking this decision,NPCILtothepresentday,hasnotconductedthenecessarystudiesthatproveaSouthDhanushkodi likefaultingphenomenonmightnotoccurattheKudankulamsiteitself.Evenwhereresearchstudieshavebeen commissioned by NPCIL, they had remained largely substandard. This has been documented by a research paperpublishedinCurrentScienceinNovember2004.
AERBhasaskedNPCILtostudythepatternoferosionandaccretionoccurringintheKudankulamshore.The shorethatislocatedwestoftheseawaterintakedykeis accretionalandtheonethatislocatedeastofthe dyke(wheretheseawaterdesalinationplantsarelocated)iserosional.Studieshaveconfirmedthattherateof accretionhasbeendeclininginthewesternzoneandtherateoferosionhasbeenclimbingupsteadilyinthe eastern zone since the year 2006. Legal and illegal coastal sand mining near Perumanal (located about 5 km west) by private companies, is said to be the reason for the shoreline tending to become more erosional. However,NPCILhasneitherbotheredtostudythisphenomenonnorhastakenthenecessarystepstocurbor restrictthecoastalsandminingactivity.ThisshedslightintothesafetypracticesfollowedbytheNPCIL.
NPCILmaintainsthatonlyfarfieldtsunamisarepossiblefortheKKNPPsite.Thishappenstobeanunproven assumption.IthasnotconductedaTsunamiHazardStudyasattemptedbyA.K.GhoshfortheMadrasAtomic PowerStationintheyear2006andpublishedintheyear2008.ThemanualonTsunamiHazardStudypublished byUSNRCinMarch2009warrantsallcoastalsitestoperformaTsunamiHazardStudy.Inordertodothis,two mainknowledgebasesneedtobecreated:1)StudyingPaleoTsunamisforthearea,and2)identifyingthenear fieldandthefarfieldtsunamigenicsources.Whileidentifyingthetsunamigenicsources,oneneedtoidentify: a)potentialtsunamigenicfaults,b)underseavolcanoes,c)areasproneforsubmarinelandslides.

In1982,twoAmericanresearchersWilliamVestalandAllenLowriehavestudiedtheseabedofsouthGulfof Mannar and have identified two large slumps 90 and 35 kilometers long. They have named them as East ComorinSlumpandColomboSlumps.Theyhavemappedtheseslumpsintricatelyandhavefoundevidencesof past landslides in these slumps. Petrographic studies in Gulf of Mannar have revealed the presence of large scaleclaystonesinthisarea.Presenceofclaystonesmaketheoccurrenceofsubmarinelandslideseasier.The volcanic vent found by V.V.Sastri et al in 1981 is located beneath the Colombo slump and the vent found by G.R.K.Murtyin1994islocatedjustbeneaththeEastComorinslump.IndranifaultextendsintoGulfofMannar and has the capacity to disturb these slumps. Any earthquake that occurs on this fault has the potential to casuetheslumptoslidedownandthustriggeranearfieldtsunami.Earthquakesthatoccurredin1938(5.8R) andin1991(5.2R)haveoccurrednearertotheseslumps.Theearthquakethatoccurredon19November2011 (5.2R)hasoccurredintheIndranifault.Itwasabout400kmsouthofKKNPP.WhiletheexpertsfromCenterfor Earth Science Studies, IMD and INCOIS were busy debating about this earthquake, NPCIL remained unconcerned.HaditknownthatthiseartquakehadthepotentialtocauseaslopefailureinoneoftheGoM slumps and thus cause a mega tsunami (wave height reaching even 100 meters), it would have actively participated inadiscussionabout this earthquake. However,becauseofits ignorance aboutthe existance of theseslumps,ithadremainedsilentandofcoursenegligenttowarditssafetyrelatedwork.
USNRChaswarnedabouttheissueofdryintakefacingthecoastalreactors.Aftertheoccurrenceofthe2004 Decembertsunami,manyepisodesofseawaterrecessionhaveoccurredintheGulfofMannarcoast.During suchperiodsofseawaterrecession,theseawaterintakeprocessrunintotrouble.Insteadofdrawingthesea water,theywouldbedrawingjustair,andthuscausingaseveredamagetothereactoritself.
Without a volcanic hazard study, tsunami hazard study and a karst hazard study in place, if the reactor gets commissioned,thechancesfortheoccurrenceofanaccidentoftheFukushimatype,areveryreal.
10
References 1. RamaswamyR1987.ReactivationofEasternghatpaleoriftsystemduringtertiaryandotherperiods,Proc. In Nat. Sem. On Tertiary orogeny, Banaras hindu University, Varanasi, 107127 ; Ramaswamy R 1991. Occurrence of Sodatrachyte near Kudangulam village, Tamilnadu, Current Sci.,61, 401 402 ; Ramaswamy,R1995.OccuranceofolivineTephoroteandcarbonateTephariteinKudangulamarea,near Cape Comorin, Tamilnadu, India, Journ.Geol.Soc. India, 45, 331333; Biju Longhinos, K.S.Anand, Mita Rajaram,SubvolcanicintrusivesofKudamkulam,Indiaagroundmagneticcharacterizationofsubsurface structure, Lasi 4 Conference, Physical Geology of Sub Volcanic Systems: Lacoliths, Sills and Dykes, Moab and Mount Hillers, (Utah USA), 2226 September 2010; M.Ramasamy, The evidence of late Cenozoic volcano tectonic deformations in Kudangulam, near Cape Comarin, Tamilnadu, International Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP), 1993; Biju Longhinos, Rama Sarma, Seismo Tectonic Signatures in and around Kudankulam, Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, February 2002, unpublished paper; A.Phillipots, IntroductiontoIgneousandMetamorphicPetrology,PrenticeHall,NewJersy,1990;S.K.Agrawal,Ashok Chauhan,AlokMishra,TheVVERsatKudanKulam,NuclearEngineeringandDesign236(2006)812835, p826 2. A.Boominathan,"SeismicsitecharacterizationfornuclearstructuresandpowerplantsCURRENTSCIENCE, VOL.87,NO.10,25NOVEMBER2004 3. IAEA, Volcanic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations, DS405 DRAFT SPECIFIC SAFETY GUIDE,27May2011.pp54,74,75 4. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/30/nation/nayucca30 ;Charles B. Connor, John A. Stamatakos, David A. Ferrill,Bri ain E. Hill, Goodluck .Ofoegbu, F. Michael Conway,2Budhi Sagar,and John Trapp, Geologic factors controlling pa erns of smallvolume basal c volcanism: Applica on to a volcanic hazards assessment at Yucca Mountain, Nevada,JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 105, NO. 1, PAGES 417432, JANUARY 10, 2000; Greg A.Valen ne, Frank V.Perry, Don Krier, Gordon N.Kea ng, Richard E.Kelley, Alen H.Cogbill, Small Volume Basal c Volcanoes: erup ve products and processes, and post erup ve geomorphic evolu on in crator at (Pleistocene), southern Neveda, Los Alamos Na onal Laboratory, December 2005; J. Spera and S. J. Fowler,Conceptual model for smallvolume alkali basalt petrogenesis:implica onsforvolcanichazardsattheproposedYuccaMountainnuclearwasterepository, in Volcanic and Tectonic Hazard Assessment for Nuclear Facili es, Ed.by Charles B. Connor, Neil A. Chapman,Laura J. Connor, August, 2009; Greg A. Valen ne and Naoto Hirano, Mechanisms of lowux intraplate volcanic eldsBasin and Range (North America) and northwest Pacic Ocean, Geological SocietyofAmerica,2010)
11
5. G.victorRajamanickam,N.Chandrasekhar.ExtrusionofRockmeltinthevicinityofhightensionelectricline, Journ.Geol.Soc.India,Vol.55,March2000;R.Ramasamy,MoltenRockExtrusions,Journ.Geol.Soc.India, Vol.55, March 2000; G.Manimaran, P.Sivasubramaniyan, M.Senthiyappan, Rock Melt Extrusion at Abhishekappatti, Tirunelvelli district, Tamil Nadu, A Report Journ. Geol.Soc. India, Vol.57, 2001;http://www.hindu.com/2005/07/16/stories/2005071615080300.htm ;S.C.Jayakaran, A note on the occurrenceoffulguriteinTamilNadu,CurrentScience75(8):763(1998);BJSAIKIA,GPARTHASARATHY,N C SARMAHand G D BARUAH, Fouriertransform infrared spectroscopic characterization of naturally occurringglassyfulgurites,Bull.Mater.Sci.,Vol.31,No.2,April2008,pp.155158;A.C.KERR,M.KHAN ANDI.MCDONALD,Erup onofbasal cmagmaatTorZawar,Balochistan,Pakistanon27January2010: geochemicalandpetrologicalconstraintsonpetrogenesis,MineralogicalMagazine,December2010,Vol. 74(6),pp.10271036 6. SUKANTA ROY, LABANI RAY, ANURUP BHATTACHARYA and R. SRINIVASAN, NEW HEAT FLOW DATA FROM DEEP BOREHOLES IN THE GREENSTONE GRANITE GNEISS AND GNEISSGRANULITE PROVINCES OF SOUTH INDIA,DeepContinetalStudiesinIndiaNewsletter,Vol.17,No.1,January2007;P.Hedervari,Volcanism and Seismicity in the IndoAustralian Seismic Belt : Manifestations of Intraplate Tectonics, March 1978 ; P.Hedervari, Catalog of Submarine Volcanoes and Hydrological Phenomena associated with Volcanic Events1500BCtoDecember31,1899,ReportSE36, WorldDataCenterAforSolidEarthGeophysics, September1984 7. AERB,KudankulamAtomicPowerProject 8. R.Ramesh, Sea Water Desalination work at the Kudankulam NPP:Possible Solution to the Risk prone Confusion,IndecisionandHaste,DOSE,October2006 9. R.Ramesh,KudankulamNuclearPowerProjectandthePechiparaiReservoirofKanniyakumariDistrict:Can PechiparaireservoirmeetKKNPPsfreshwaterdemand?DOSE,October2006 10. P.SheikMujabar,"QuantitativeAnalysisOfCoastalLandformDynamicsBetweenTuticorinandKnyakumari using Remote Sensing And GIS, M.Phil Thesis, Center for Geotechnology, Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University,Tirunelveli,February2010,p166 11. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/20090628/chennai/28156215_1_bulkwaterpurchase agreementmldofpotablewaterkattupalli 12. Krishnamurthy et al., Interim Report Of Task Force On Safety Evaluation Of The Systems Of KKNPP Post FukushimaEvent,21May2011 13. T.S.SUBRAMANIAN,AERBformorepower,waterfornuclearstations,TheHindu,12November2011
12
14. G.G.Vaz, M.Hariprasad, B.R.Rao, V.Subba Rao, Subsidence of southern part of erstwhile Dhanushkodi township, Tamil Nadu evidences from bathymetry, side scan and underwater videography, Current Science,Vol.92,No.5,10March2007 15. BRUCKNER, H., 1988, Indicators for formerly higher sea levels along the east coast of India and on the AndamanIslands:HamburgerGeographischeStudien,v.44,p.4772;BrucknerH1989lateQuaternary shorelinesinIndia;In:LateQuaternarysealevelcorrelationandapplication;(eds)ScottDB,PirazzoliPA andHonig CA, Kluwer AcademicPublishers,pp.169194;Ramasamy, S., ArmstrongAltrin Sam,J.,1998. InferencesonrhodoidsfromNeogenecarbonatesofKudankulam,TamilNadu,India.Geol.Soc.Ind.J.52, 341344;S.AemstrongAltrin,YangIlLee,SurendraVarma,S.Ramasamy,GeochemistryofSandstonesfrom Upper Miocene Kudankulam Formation, Southern India : Implications for Provenance Weathering and TectonicSetting,JournalofSeimentaryResearch,Vol.74,NO.2,2004 16. (G.R.K. MURTY, Y. SATYANARAYANA AND T. PRADEEP KUMAR " Magnetic Profile Across Gulf of Mannar", JOURNALGEOLOGICALSOCIETYOFINDIA,Vol.44,Oct.1994,pp.443449).(SASTRI,V.V.VENKATACHALA, B.S. and NARAYAN, V. (1981) The evolution of East Coast India. Paleogeogr.Palacoclim Palacoeco., pp.366 2354; PRABHAKAR, K.N. and ZUTSHI, PL. (1993) Evolution of southern part of Indian East Coast Basins.J.Geol.Soc.Ind.,v.41,pp.215230;NAINI,R.BHOPALandTALWANI,M.(1982)Structuralframework and evolutionary hisotry of the continental margin of western India. In: Studics in continental margin geology.(Eds)WATKINS,J.S.andDRAKE,C.L.Am.Assn.Petrol.Geol.Memoir,v.34,pp.167191;KHALE,HG., TALWANI,M.andELDKLOM,O.(1976)GeophysicalstudyonthecontinentalmarginofsouthIndiaandwest ofSriLanka.EOS,Trans.Am.Geophys.Union.57.to.933;EREMENKO,N.A.,andGAGELGANZ.A(1966)New dataonthetecionicframeworkoftheNewIndianPeninsula,Bull.ONGC,v.3(2),pp13;CARL,W.S.(1966) Scismcily of the Indian Ocean, J.Geophy..Res.v.71, pp25752581; Udintsev (1975), Geological and GeophysicalAtlasoftheIndianOcean,Moscow,AcademyofSciences,151p.) 17. MalaiMalar,26November2011 18. http://tamil.oneindia.in/news/2005/05/23/sea.html 19. R.Prasad,TsunamiHazard Assessment atNuclear PowerPlantSitesin theUnitedStates ofAmericaFinal Report,USNRC,March2009 20. IAEA, Volcanic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations, DS405 DRAFT SPECIFIC SAFETY GUIDE,27May2011 21. WilliamVestal,AllenLowrie,LargeScaleSlumpsOffSouthernIndiaandSriLanka",GeoMarineLetters, Vol.2,171177(1982)
13
1 1
AERB, clearance letter dated 10 November 1989
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) , 2003, EIA for KKNPP 1 and 2 Reactors, p 2-45
1 National Environmental Engineering Research Institute Chapter 3: Baseline Status and Impact Statement page 3.47 3.3.2.1
Krishnamurthy et al Interim Report Of Task Force On Safety Evaluation Of The Systems Of KKNPP Post Fukushima Event, 21 May 2011 Presentation to Tamilnadu Government nominees and the people (sic) representatives regarding safety of KKNPP on 1811-2011 in the office of the District Collector, Tirunelveli by Expert Group on KKNPP constituted by the Government of India, 18 Nov 2011
1 1 1
Rajeev Deshpande, Indian N-plants step up safety measures, Times of India TNN | Oct 19, 2011.
VT Padmanabhan, 2011, Space weather anomalies and nuclear safety. Paper presented at the National Seminar on Nuclear Safety at Kuvempu University on 10 Nov 2011.
1
More safety features at KNPP soon New Delhi. Deccan Herald, Nov 11, 3011, DHNS:
14
CHAPTER - 2
WATER BALANCE SHEET OF KUDANKULAM NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS (KKNPP)
RRamesh,VTPadmanabhanandVPugazhendi
Summary
The main raw materials used in a pressurized water reactor (PWR), are uranium and water. A 1000 MW(e) reactorwillburnabout3,000gramsof235uraniumaday.Thethermalenergygeneratedinthecoreistakenout usingwater.Thereactorrequiresabout3millionlitersoffreshandpurewaterand7.2billionlitersofseawater everyday.Ifthereisnouranium,therewillbenofission,noheatandnoelectricity.Evenwhenelectricityis notgenerated,waterisrequiredtoremovethedecayheatfromthespentfuelforaminimumoftenyears.In short,wateristhesoulofthereactor.ThecampusoftheKudankulamNuclearPowerPlants(KKNPP)located ontheBayofBengalcoastinTirunelveliKattabommandistrictofTamilNadu,Indiaistheonlyoneintheworld totally dependent on desalination plants for their industrial and domestic water requirements. The reserve wateravailableisnotevensufficienttomeettherequirementsfortwodays.
Introduction
TheNuclearPowerCorporationofIndiaLtd(NPCIL)constructedtwo1000MW(e)pressurizedwaterreactors (PWR)atKudankulaminTirunelvelidistrictofTamilNadu.ThefirstunitwastobecommissionedinDecember 2011.Localcommunitiesstalledthecommissioningofthereactorastheyfearthatthereactorcomplexisa threattotheirlives.Analysisoftheofficialdocumentsrevealsthatthepeoplesapprehensionsarecorrectas thereisnotenoughreservewaterinsidethecampusforcoolingthereactorcoresandthespentfuelpoolsin case the desalination plant fails. None of the conditions regarding reserve water laid down by the Atomic EnergyRegulatoryBoardinitssanctionletterdated10Nov1989hasbeenmet.Hence,theconstructionofthe campusisillegal.CommissioningthereactorinthisconditionmayleadtoChernobylizationofthepeninsular India.
15
HistoryofKudankulamNuclearPowerProject(KKNPP)
Theproject,aproductoftheRajivGorbachevsummitof1988wasgivenconditionalclearancebytheAtomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) of the Government of India is 1989. In the original proposal, fresh water industrialanddomesticpurposeswastobebroughtfromPechiparaireservoir,65kmNorthWestofthesiteon the river Kodayar, in Kanyakumari district. While giving its nod to the project, AERB made the following conditionsregardingfreshwater:i Facility to store at site adequate quantities of water should be provided to meet the makeup requirementsofuninterruptedcoolingofcoreandothersafetyrelatedsystemsonalongtermbasis.
Facilitiesengineered at site shouldmeetthe requirementseven intheeventofpossibledisruption of pipedwatersupplyfromPechiparaiDam.
Groundwatersourcesinthesiteareashouldbesurveyedanddevelopedtoserveasanadditionalback upsourcetomeetthesafetyneedsoftheplantifwatersupplyfromPechiparaidamisinterrupteddue toanycontingency.
Thesafetyofthe65kmlongpipelinefromPechiparaidamshouldbeensuredbyappropriatesecurity arrangement.
Theintakewellatthedamshouldbeprovidedatlowerelevationthantheminimumdrawdownlevelof thereservoir.
TheBoarddesiresthatthestructuralstabilityofthereservoirshouldbeassessedtakingintoaccount therecentworkofstrengtheningthedam.
Intheunlikelyeventofthebreachofthedam,alternativesourcesofwatersupplyshouldbeavailable forthesitewithinareasonabletime.
NPCIL should conceptualize schemes at the Detailed Project Report (DPR) stage for utilization of the waterfromUpperKodayarreservoirforsuchaneventuality.
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project prepared by the National Environmental EngineeringResearchInstitute(NEERI)13yearsaftertheAERBclearancestatesthat:ii
For meeting fresh water demands, water from Pechiparai dam will be brought to the site through embedded pipeline. This pipeline will be adequately designed to withstand all design forces. At project site, it is proposed to construct a reservoir with a capacity to store 7 days requirement of
16
processanddrinkingwater(ofcapacityapproximately60,000m3for2units).Thisreservoirisplanned to be located at an elevation of 35 m. which is much above the safe grade elevation of the reactor building.
FreshwaterformakeuptotheplantsystemswillbepassedthroughsandfiltersandD.M.plant.For domesticusewithinthetownship,theseawaterwillbepassedthroughreverseosmosisplantandwill betreatedinaconventionalwatertreatmentplantfollowedbychlorination.ThecapacityofROplant wouldbe2x25m3perhour.(1,200m3pd)
In2004,NEERIwroteanotherEIAfortheproposed3rdand4thunitatthesamesite,inwhichradicalchangesin theplanforthefirsttworeactorsunderconstructionwereannounced:iii
Industrial Water requirement for Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project was originally envisaged to be drawnfromPechiparaireservoir.Duetoseveredroughtduetopoorrainfallinthisregionanddueto the lack of underground ground water reserves, precarious water shortage exists in the region, Consideringallthis,andasNuclearPowerPlantsrequireabundantandreliablesourceofWatersupply, NPCILhasdecidedtosetupcaptivedesalinationplant,whichwouldmeettotalrequirementofNuclear Power Station. The desalination plant can produce 320cu.m/hr of fresh water from 670cu.m/hr of seawaterformeetingthefreshwatermakeuprequirements.
WaterrequirementsofKKNPP
InKKNPPreactorsfresh,demineralisedanddeionizedwaterwillbeusedasprimaryandsecondarycoolant andseawaterwillbeusedastertiary(condenser)coolant.Whileunderoperation,eachreactorwillrequire 3500cubmetersoffreshwaterand7.2millioncubmetersofseawatereveryday.Freshwaterisalsoneeded asareserveforfirefighting.Oneyearaftercommissioning,thespentfuelremovedfromthecoreandkeptin thespentfuelpoolwillalsoneedtobecooledusingfreshwater.
On the issue of availability and requirement of water, there are major differences in the official reports: Altogether6desalinationplantsweresetupatKKNPPsite.Thefirsttwowerebasedonreverseosmosiswitha capacityof 600cubmetersperday each. These weretomeetthedomestic needsofthetownship andthe plant site. Four more plants were constructed by an Israeli firm for production of industrial water for two reactors. These were based on multiple vapour compression (MVC) technology. Of the four plants, three wouldbeonlineandoneonstandby.OfficialreportsdifferonproductionandallocationofwateratKKNPP:
17
Onproduction
AccordingtoPostFukushimaTaskForceReport,thetotalproductionfrom3plantswillbe7,200cub metersaday.iv AccordingtothereportoftheExpertGroupthetotalproductionis7680cubmetersaday.v
Onthepotablewaterrequirement:
AccordingtoNEERIEIA,is414cubmeteraday. AccordingtotheGOIExpertCommitteeis1272cubmetersaday.
Desalinationplants
KKNPPconstructedsixdesalinationplants.Thefirsttwowithacombinedcapacityof1200cubmeterswere basedonreverseosmosistechnologyprovidedbyBARC.Thereisnomentionabouttheseplantsinanyofthe recentofficialreports.TheotherfourplantsarebasedonMultipleVapourCompression(MVC)technology.The plantswerebuiltbyanIsraelicompanyatacostofRs1150million.BARCisknownasaleaderinseawater desalination. They have built small and large plants inside their campus, in villages of Lakshadweep and RajasthanandalsoforprivatecorporationslikeESSARandReliance.Therearealsoseveraldesalinationplants in India producing water for both industrial and domestic needs. However, KKNPP plants are the only one basedonMVCtechnology.Assuch,itisdoubtfulwhetherIndiahasthehumanpowertohandlemajordefects intheplants.
ReserveWater
The campus has 12 tanks with a combined storage capacity 12,445 cub meters. Of this, 2000 cub meter of waterisinfirewatertanksand1425cubmeterisintanksfordomesticuselocatedoutsidetheKKNPPIsland. Leavingasidethese,KKNPPhasamaximumstoragecapacityof9020cubmeters,sufficientenoughtoruntwo reactorsforaboutoneandahalfdays.Thereserveindomesticwatertankswillnotevenlastthatlonger. AccordingtoEGR,theinventoryavailableinvarioustanksisadequateforcoolingrequirementofreactorPlant foratleasttendaysincaseofpowerfailurefromthegrid(eventhoughtheregulatoryrequirementisonly7 days.
Thereservewateravailableatthedomesticwatertanksis1425cubmeters,whereasthedailyrequirementis 1272cubmeters.Thetownshippeoplewillreducetheirconsumption,oncetheyknowthattheyareonreserve water.Eventhen,thereservemaynotlastformorethan3days.Willthescientistsandtechniciansreportto duty,whenthereisnotadropofwaterintheirapartments?

18
The Expert Group mentions grid failure as the cause of interruption in production of water. Under normal circumstances,thegridwillbereconnectedinadayortwo.Andwhenthegridfails,reactorswillalsobeshut downandthecoolingrequirementsareminimal.Longertermcollapseofthegrid,morethanamonthoreven yearisalsoapossibility.ThisissueisdiscussedinanothersectiononSpaceWeatherAnomalies. RESERVEWATERATKKNPP Ser 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Locationofstorage DMwaterstoragetanksinDMPlant DMwaterstoragetankLCPnearTB Deaerator EmergencywaterstorageinSFP ECCStankstage1 ECCStankstage2 DistillatestoragetanksKBC BoricacidtanksKBD SFPfillingtanks Firewatertank DesalinationPlant Domesticwatertank Total Totallessdomestic
CubMeter 1580 1000 250 500 240 960 1580 320 800 2000 790 1425 11445 10020
Source:SKrishnamurthyetal,TaskForceReport(ref1)
Thoughanuclearreactorgenerateselectricity,allreactorsaredependentongridpowerformaintainingtheir safety related pumps and instrumentations. When the grid fails, reactors will have to be shut down. The coolingrequirementduringshutdownbeingconsiderablylower,9020cubmeterofreservewatercankeepthe reactorsundercontrolfor10days.
Adesalinationplantisacomplicatedmachinewhichhastocleanandsterilizeseawaterabiologicallycomplex medium.Thatmachinecanfailforreasonsotherthangridfailure.Thesecanbewear,tearandcorrosionofits owncomponentsortheattackofthoseknownandunknownlifeformsgroupedasfoulingagents.

19
Duringperiodsofsuchfailuresoftwodesalinationplants(includingtheoneonstandby),thereactorsalsowill havetobeshutdown.Unlikeothermachines,anuclearreactorcannotberestartedimmediatelyaftertheshut down, because of the phenomenon called the iodine pit. Since there is not much of expertise in MVC desalinationinIndia,specialistsmayhavetobebroughtinfromIsraeltosolvetheproblems.Ifthedesalination plantscannotbebroughtinstreamwithin10days,wherewilltheybringthewaterfrom?
By the middle of 2012, there would have been two reactors functioning at KKNPP. By the end of 2012, the spent fuel pool would also require fresh, demineralized, deionized water as coolant. It is not clear if the existingreserveissufficienttomeetallthesethreedemandsforsevendays.
TheWorldofVirtualWater
Quoting the government sources several stories have appeared in the national media showing that the reactorshaveenoughreservewater.ExcerptsfromareportthatappearedinTimesofIndia:(Oct19,2011):
Incaseofanaccidentoranaturaldisasternecessitatingtheactivationofemergencymeasures,the coolingofthe coreistoppriority anddrawinglessons fromtheFukushima scenario wheregusts of radioactivesteamescapedintotheatmospherefordays,India'splantsarenowsuppliedbyalternate watersourcesthatwillnotbevulnerabletodisruption.Notdependingononsitewatersources alone, water pipelines from remote locations will supplement and provide fallback apparatus. India has ramped up safeguards at its atomic power plants with three layers of power back ups, waterpipesdrawnfromoffsitelocations,elevatedwatertowersandoptionsforinjectingnitrogen topreventexplosions.vi InapaperpresentedataNationalSeminaronEnvironmentandNuclearSafetyatKuvempuUniversityon10th Nov2011,oneofushadreferredtotheinadequatewaterreserveatKKNPP.viiNextday,KasinathBalaji,site directorofKudankulamNuclearPowerPlanttoldtheDeccanHerald:Wearesettingupatankof8,000cubic metercapacityasanadditionalsourceofwater.Alsotherewillbemobilepowerunitstorunthepumpincase ofstationblackoutandfailureofallemergencygenerators.viii
CONCLUSION
NPCILdidnotdoitshomeworkbeforesigningacontractworthofRs130billion.Priorstudieshadrevealed that during 1901 1989, Kanyakumari District (in which Pechiparai Dam is located) had faced 52 years of
20
draughtanddraughtlikesituations.InastudyontherunoffinthePechiparaiDamfortheyears1963to1990 (27years),itwasfoundthattheactualrunoffwasabout15%to37%lessthantheexpectedaverage. NPCIL has constructed the KKNPP campus in violation of the terms and conditions laid down by the Atomic EnergyRegulatoryBoardin1998.NPCILandelementswithintheGovernmentofIndiahavebeenspreading misinformationaboutthesafetyofthereactorcomplex.Sincethebackupforcoolantwaterisinsufficient,the commissioningofthereactorwillbeadangerousgamble.IncidentallyKKNPPistheonlyreactorcampusinthe worldtotallydependingonamachineformeetingtheindustrialandthedomesticwaterrequirements. Thefirstprojectproposalstatedthattherewillbeareservoirwithacapacityof60,000cubmetersofwater broughtfromPechiparai.EventhoughPechiparaiisoff,theycouldstillstorethiswaterwiththeproductfrom fourdesalinationplantsworkingonfullsteamfor6days.Theseplantshavebeenlyingidleforthepastthree years.Butthenwhyisitthattheydidnotconstructthe60,000cubmeterreservoirthere?
21
CHAPTER3
THE MINING ACTIVITIES AT KKNPP SITE

VTPadmanabhan,RRamesh,VPugazhendi
NPCILboughtabout10sqkmoflandatKudankulamtosetupnuclearpowerplants.Ofthis,about2.2sqkm of land was leased for lime stone mining to a private cement factory. NPCIL did not carry out any mining activityaspertheclassificationbytheExpertGroupappointedbytheGovernmentofIndiatoAllaytheFearof theLocals .
1
Unlike other places of business, site of a nuclear power plant and its neighborhood is closely studied and properrecordshavetobemaintained.NEERIhaddonethisatKKNPPsite.IntheirEIAReportsforreactors12 and36,theminingactivitiesundertakenoutsideKKNPPareaaregiven.
ThereisastonequarryatErukkanthurai,whichisatadistanceofaround6kmfromthesite.Excavationand quarrying is done through softmining.There isalsoastone quarry at adistanceof5kmfromthesitenear Vijayapati. Here, only open soft excavation is used up to 2 meters depth. The other stone quarries are at distancesofmorethan18kmfromthesite EIAfor1and2reactorswasdraftedinJan2003).
23
TheHonourableMr.JusticeK.Chandruinhisorderdated20September,2007notedthatminingactivitieswere carriedoutbyM/sIndiaCementin220hectaresoflandduring19992004.Totalextractionintheyear200304 was 1.4 million tons of limestone and the mine site (currently reactor site) had a closing balance was 2.9
22
milliontonsason31March2004.Itwasstatedthatonenquiry,thepetitionerhaskepttwostockpoints.One nearthemineandanotherat5KMawayfromthemines.Inthestockpointnearthemineisanonroyaltyand noncesspaidrawmaterialarestored.Theotherstockyardat5KMawayisaroyaltyandCesspaidmaterials arekept. NEERIevenreportsabouttheminingactivitiesat5kmand18kmawayfromthesite.Itisstrangethatthereis norecordofthisheavyextractionanywhereinthedocumentsavailableinthepublicdomain.Ason1stApril 2003,theKudankulamnuclearsitehad2.4milliontonsofminedlimestoneasmentionedintheorderofthe HighCourt.
WhiletheheavymachineriesofM/sIndiaCementswereextractinglimestonefromKKNPPsite,thefollowing nuclearrelatedactivitieswerealsotakingplacethere:
GroundBreak
Sep2001 Mar2002 Jul2002 Mar2003 Sep2003
FirstPourofConcrete
CompletionofFoundationSlab Completionof0.00mSlab Constructionupto+5.4Slab
Acknowledgement:WeareextremelygratefultoAdvGuruswamyoftheMaduraiBenchoftheMadrasHigh Courtforprovidingthisvaluableinformation.
References
1
Presentation by the Central Government Expert Group on 18 Nov 2011 Dr RN Singh, VP Deshpande, PR Chouhan and R Sarin (EIA 1+2, chapter 1 page 1.4 EIA for KKNPP reactors 3-6, page 1.4 M/s.India Cements Ltd vs Cess Commissioner W.P.(MD)No.10169 of 2005, W.P.M.P.No.10871 of 2005 and
W.V.M.P.No.67 of 2006 http://indiankanoon.org/doc/912481/

5
KKNPP Major milestones http://www.npcil.nic.in/main/ConstructionDetail.aspx?ReactorID=77
23
CHAPTER - 4
THE UNACCOUNTED POPULATION LIVING IN THE STERILIZED ZONE OF KKNPP AND THE ROUTINE AIR RELEASES OF RADIONUCLIDES
VTPadmanabhan,RRameshandVPugazhendi
TheExpertCommitteeforAllayingtheFearofthePublicsaysthattherewasnobodywithinadistanceof2km from KKNPP in 2001. This is absolutely true. In response to PMANE Expert Groups observation that the population data is outdated, Dr Muthunayagam, convener of the Government Expert Group said that the currentpopulationcanbeestimatedbyusingthedecadalgrowthrate.
It is possible to estimate the current population from the 2001 census data, if there has not been any large scalepopulationtransfer.ThisisnotthecaseinthesterilizationzoneofKKNPP.Aroundthemiddleofthelast decade, about 2000 people have moved into a township known as CASANagar, a tsunami survivors rehabilitation project. There are 450 housing units in CASANagar. These residents were earlier living in Idinthakaraiandnearbyvillages.CASANagarisonly900metersfromtheKKNPP;dangerouslyclosetoastack emitting50trillionBecquerelsofassortedradionuclideseveryyear.Sincethesehomesarelessthan2kmfrom thestack,thelungburdenofthepeoplelivingtherecanbeestimatedfromcolumns6and7above.
24
KKNPPishavingdetailsofpopulationtobeevacuatedinthecaseofaradiologicalemergency.Itappearsthat theydonotknowanythingaboutCASANagar.Thesearethepeoplewhoneedtobeevacuatedfirst. Unlikeothertsunamivictims,CASANagarpeopleweregivenaconditionalownershiptothosebuildings.The titledeedsaysthatincaseofadisaster(nuclear?)theywillhavetovacatetheplaceimmediately.Theyhaveno rightforcompensationinsuchcase. Howdidthiscolonycomeupsoclosetothestack,withinthesterilizedzone?Thelowergovernmentofficials whomadethesiteselection,theNGOswhosupervisedtheconstructionandthebeneficiariescouldhavebeen ignorant about the rules regarding the sterilized zone. However, the scientists and the managers of KKNPP werepresentinandaroundthecampussince2004.
GaseousRoutineEmissionFromKKNPP
Islivingsoclosetoanuclearstackriskyatall?TheCentralGovernmentExpertGroupReportsays:
KKNPPreactorhasa100meterhighstack,higherthanthereactorbuildings.Whyarethesestacksstandingso tall?AretiredregulatoryscientistofAERBsaidthatthestackheightensuresthatthereleasedradionuclides will not reenter the campus. Obviously, the exhaust air from building ventilation systems cannot be that dangerous to throw away so much money on a stack. So what does a VVER reactor throws out through its stack?
KKNPPEIAforreactors3and4hassomedataontheradioactivegasesthatwouldbereleasedfromthem.That listavailableinChapter4,page4.1ofKKNPPEIAfor3rdand4threactorsispartialandhaslesserdetails.The UnitedNationsScientificCommitteeonEffectsofAtomicRadiation(UNSCEAR)haspublishedmoredetailsof VVERreactoremission.Detailsregardingtheemissionofradioactivexenon,iodine,tritium,radiocarbonand particulatespergigawatt(1000MW)intheyear2002fromaHungarianVVERreactoraregivenincolumn3of table below. UNSCEAR Report of 2000 has published the concentration of released radioactive particles at different distances from the stack and also the average volume of air breathed by people in different age groups. Column3ofthetablehasthereleasedatafortheyear2002aspublishedinUNSCEAR,2008.Column4has quantityreleasedinaday,column5hastheestimatedconcentrationofthereleasedradionuclidepercubic meterofairatadistanceof2kmfromthestack.Anaverageinfantbreathes2860litersofairandanadult(>17 year)takesin22,200litersaday.Estimatedradioactivitybreathedinbyaninfantandanadultinadayisgiven incolumns6and7.
25
Thesearemaximumvalues.Theconcentrationataparticularplacewilldependuponthewinddirection.And as wind blows in all directions, to arrive at the concentration in a particular place, we should have annual averagewinddata. The emittedradionuclides are either gases or nanoparticles and they know no limits. The concentrations at distancesgreaterthan2kmcanbeknownbyusingthedataistable5ofUNSCEAR2000Report,AnnexA.
RoutineReleasesfromaVVERReactorInHungaryIn2002Becquerels AndConcentrationInACubicMeterOfAirAt2KmFromStackAnd InTheAirBreathedByAnInfantAndAnAdultInADay

Concentration inAir Isotopes
135Xenon(Noblegas) 3HTritium 133Iodine 14Carbon xxParticulates
Halflife OneYear OneDay

9.5.E+10 1.1.E+10 1.5.E+05 1.2.E+09 3.7.E+10 1.4.E+11
ConcentrationinAir breathed Infant

2.86 68178 7670 0 889 26663 103400
at1km percubmeter
0.0000003 2.38E+04 2.68E+03 3.66E02 3.11E+02 9.32E+03 3.62E+04
byan Adult
22.2 1513555 170275 2 19730 591908 2295470
5.5days 12.3years 8.3days 5745years Diverse(longlived)
3E+13 4E+12 5E+07 5E+11 1E+13
Total 5E+13
Sources:
UNSCEAR, 2006, TABLES A4, A5 & A6, Generation of electricity and release of radionuclides http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications.html UNSCEAR, 2000 Annex A, Table 5 Dilution factors for the representative source and long-term average conditions UNSCEAR, 2000 Annex A, Table 16 Age-weighted breathing rate for the world population
26
CHAPTER - 5
NOTE ON SAFETYOF KKNPP REACTORS - GENERAL COMPARISON OF THE POST-FUKUSHIMA TASK FORCE REPORTS FOR MADRAS ATOMIC POWER STATION (MAPS) AND KUDANKULAM NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (KKNPP)
VTPadmanabhan,DrRRamesh,DrVPugazhendi
Introduction
Post Fukushima, NPCIL appointed separate task forces consisting of nuclear experts to examine the entire commercial nuclear power plants, including the yet to be commissioned reactors at Kudankulam. The committees for Madras Atomic Power station (MAPS) and Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) were headedbySKrishnamurthy,aseniorscientistatMAPS.BoththesestationsarelocatedinTamilNaducoastof Bay of Bengal. MAPS has two 220 MW(e) pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWR) and KKNPP has two pressurizedwaterreactors(PWR),MAPSis65kmfromChennai,KKNPPis60northofKanyakumari.
SameEcosystemdifferentlevelsofrisks
The Madras Atomic Power Station and the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) are located in the same campusandthedistancebetweenthetwoislessthanakilometer.KudankulamNuclearPowerPlant(KKNPP) is400kmsouthoffMAPS.AllthethreesystemsarelocatedareontheBayofBengalcoast.
27
For the worst case scenario, the MAPS committee considered 2004 Sumatra tsunami and 1977 cyclone with landfallinAndhraPradesh.KKNPPcommitteeconsidered2004tsunamiandfivestormswithmaximumwind speedsrangingfrom61 to 114kmphrecorded in(the) regionduringthe periodfrom 1891to1986. There weremoreintensecyclonesinSouthernBayofBengal,theonethathitChennaiinNovDec1996lastedfor9 daysreportedtobeverylonglifecomparedtoanycycloneintheIndianOcean.
Riskofflood
Thewaterlevelexperiencedat(KKNPP)siteduringthe2004tsunamiwasonlyabout2.2metersabovemean sealevel.ThefloodlevelexperiencedatMAPSduringthesametsunamiwas10.5meters. KKNPP task force considered flooding of 5 meters above mean sea level in their worst case scenario. This includes2.5metersfromafuturetsunamiand2.5metersfromacyclone.KKNPPThedesignmaximumsea levelwitha0.01%probability(thatoccursonceevery10000years)isestimatedasplus5.30m(MSL).Thesea wall is 8 meters high, reactors, turbines, steam generators are all above 9 meters MSL. The task force says thereisabufferof4meters.
TheMAPSexpertcommitteeusedadifferentcalculation.Intheirownwords:ForMAPS,takingintoaccount 1977 severe cyclone at Andhra, the safe grade level from cyclonic storms had been arrived at as 10.45 m. Hence for the purpose of this analysis, a flood level of 15 meters is taken. Ifata later date, this figure gets revised on further review, the new figures can be adopted, to revise the analysis. While KKNPP group consideredboththetsunamiandthecyclone,theMAPSgroupforgottoincludetsunamiintheirequation.
Since the MAPS committee anticipates a flood level of 15 meters MSL, many of the structures will be under water.Yet,thereactorswillbeshutdownsafely,coreandspentfuelpoolwillbecooled.AtKKNPPtheexperts concludedthatsincethefloodlevelwillbe5metersunderworstcasescenarioandsinceallthebuildingsare above8meters,thereisnothreattoanystructuresfromanynaturalcalamitiesduringthenext1000years.
28
PFBRForaperiodof1000years,theoriginalsafegradelevelforPFBRwasdesignedas14m.However,since theoriginalraftconstructionbeforeTsunamiwave,inundatedbyTsunamiwater,therafthadtoberedonetaking theoriginalraftasdatum.Inviewofthis,thefinishedgradelevelforPFBRbecame15.4meters.Allsafetyrelated structuresofPFBRarelocatedat15.4metersorabove.
IsKKNPP readytofaceaFukushimatypeevent? AccordingtotheTaskForceReport,tofurtherenhancethe level of safety and to build more defense in depth the committee recommends the implementation of the measuresoutlined to copeupwithunanticipatedandrare severe andmultiple naturaleventshaving verylow probabilityliketheonethattookplaceatFukushima...Theengineeringdetailsoftheseadditionalmeasuresare being worked out. The schedule (short term and long term) of implementation will be submitted along with engineeringdetailsbyendAugust2011.
ThedetailedengineeringreportwhichwastobesubmittedbytheendofAugustandthedetailsregardingits implementationisnotknown.
ThePassiveSafetyFeaturesofTheThirdGenerationReactorsAtKKNPP
VVER reactors under construction at Kudankulam are third generation Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR). Newest models do have better safety features than the older ones. However, these features have not been testedinreallifesituations.Theyaretheproductsofsimulationsandmodels.Thefollowingquotesfroman AERBbookshouldbereadalongwiththeclaimsofsafetybytheproponents.
PassiveHeatRemovalSystem(PHRS) PostFukushimaTaskForceReportsays:
3.11CorecoolingduringSBO:IncaseofsimultaneouslossofGrIIIandGrIIpowersupplyreactorisshutdown automatically and core cooling is achieved by natural circulation of primary coolant system through steam generators. Heat removal from SG takes place initially through atmospheric discharge valves and PHRS. On sensinglowlevelinSGclosureofFastSteamIsolatingValve(FSIV)willtakeplaceandSGcoolingwillcontinue usingPHRS.Asperthesafetyanalysisreports,primarycoolanttemperature&pressurecomesdownto165C and3.4MPaafter24hrs.

29
AERBSays
CoreCoolingduringSBO This system hasbeenprovidedtorejectdecayheatof reactorcoretooutside

atmosphere, during Station Black Out (SBO) condition lasting upto 24 hours. The system can maintain hot shutdownconditionofthereactor,thus,delayingneedforboroninjection.PHRShasfourindependenttrains, each with three aircooled heat exchangers located along the periphery on the outside of the secondary containment. Three trains are designed to provide 100% heat rejection capacity with reactor in shutdown conditioni.e.2%ofreactorratedpower.Speciallydesignedairinlet/outletdampersareprovidedacrossheat exchangersofPHRSforcontrollingairflowovertheseHXs.Experiencewithspeciallydesignedairinlet/outlet dampersisnotavailable.(emphasisadded)Functionaltestsfordamperopening/closing/modulationonsteam pressuresignalduringcommissioningaswellasperiodictestswillhavetobedone.(AERBChapter5pp5354, ref3)
SecondStageECCSAccumulators EmergencyCoreCoolingSystem(ECCS)hasfoursubsystems,namely(i)
highpressureemergencyinjectionsystem,(ii)firststagehydro accumulators, (iii)long termrecirculationand decay heat removal system (JNA) and (iv) second stage ECCS hydro accumulators. Second stage ECCS hydro accumulatorshavebeendesignedtosupplyboratedwaterfor corecooling.Thedesignenvisagesdecayheat removalduringBDBAconditionofLOCAwithSBOfor24hourswhenthesystemoperatestogetherwithPHRS. Performanceofthesystemandespeciallyofproperfunctioningofthespecialcheckvalveswouldbeascertained duringcommissioningphase.
Quick Boron Injection System Two systems, EBIS and QBIS are provided which can individually make the
reactorsubcriticalbyaddingconcentratedboricacidsolutionduringanATWScondition.Thissystemwouldbe tested during commissioning to establish its effectiveness and to ensure its performance is as per the design intent.(AERBpage54,ref3)
Systemforretainingandcoolingofmoltencore AnExVesselcorecatcherfilledwithspeciallydeveloped
compound(oxidesofFe,Al&Gd)isprovidedforretentionofsolidandliquidfragmentsofthedamagedcore, partsoftheRPVandreactorinternalsundersevereaccidentconditionresultinginmeltingofcoreandfailureof RPV.Thefillingcompoundprovidesvolumetricdispersalofthemelt.Itprovidessubcriticalityofthemeltand preventsitfromspreadingbeyondthelimitsofcontainment.Thefillercompoundhasbeendevelopedtohave minimumgasreleaseduringdispersalandretentionofcoremelt.Coolingwatercanbesuppliedontopofcore catcher from water storage inside the reactor building by opening of a remotely operated valve as per the accident management procedure. By design, accumulation of leaked out water from primary coolant system
30
and ECCS provides cooling of core catcher vessel from outside without any need for operators intervention. Appropriate surveillance requirements for this novel feature will have to be worked out and incorporated in TechnicalSpecificationsforOperation.(AERBpage54,ref3)
InShortthesearealluntestedsystemandtheirperformanceswillbeevaluatedduringthecommissioningand testsinfuture.
TheGlobalCoolingatKudankulam?
Thereisfearamongthefisherfolkthatthedischargeof7.2billionlitersofhotwaterintotheseaeveryday fromeveryreactoratKudankulammayincreasethetemperatureofseawateranddestroythefisheries.Toallay thisfear,theCentralGovernmentsExpertGroupsaysthat:1
Themaximumtemperatureofseawaterduringthesummerof2003was30CaccordingtoNEERIasperthe studyofthePhysicochemicalCharacteristicsofMarineWaterduring2003.,2
Some 7 years after this sampling, the maximum temperature is down from 30 C to 29 C as is seen in the presentationoftheExpertGroupappointedbytheGovernmentofIndiatoAllaytheFearoftheLocals.
TheGovernmentofIndiaExpertGroupforKKNPP
TheEGhasreviewedthedesignsafetyaspectsofKKNPPandhaveconcludedthatandaccidentsimilartothat occurredatFukushimaisnotconceivableatKKNPP(page2)
References 1. S. Krishnamurthy, U. S. Khare, K. R. Anilkumar, Suresh Kumar Pillai, R. K. Gupta. (2011) Interim Report Of Task Force On Safety Evaluation Of The Systems Of KKNPP Post Fukushima Event 2. S.Krishnamurthy, M.Ramasomayajulu R.R.Sahaya, S.Chandramouli (2011) Safety Evaluation Of Indian Nuclear Power Plants Phwrs At Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS)
31
3. Deepak De, R.I. Gujrathi, S.K. Warrier, S.T. Swamy andS.C. Utkarsh, http://www.aerb.gov.in/T/sj/book/chapter5.pdf 4. Presentation by the Central Government Expert Group on 18 Nov 2011
5. Presentation by the Central Government Expert Group on 18 Nov 2011 6. EIA for KKNPP reactors 3-6, page 3.53

32
CHAPTER - 6
SPACE WEATHER ANOMALIES AND NUCLEAR SAFETY
VTPadmanabhan
After the Fukushima event several expert committees have examined the safety aspects of nuclear power plants in India. These reportsdiscuss their preparedness to meet a oneintenthousand year flood that can lead to a radiological emergency. So, the discussion is about extreme events, known as High Impact Low FrequencyEvents(HILFE).SpaceweatherisaHILFEbeingdiscussedbythescientificestablishmentinUSAlike the Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL), NASA, the US National Academy of Science (NAS) and the US NuclearRegulatoryCommission(NRC)tonameafew.ThisHILFEeventhasnotreceivedanyattentionfromthe proponentsoropponentsofnuclearenergyinIndia..
Whatisspaceweather?
Besidesthevisiblelightandultravioletradiations,theEarthandotherplanetsintheSolarSystemalsoreceive otherformsofmatterandenergyonaregularbasisfromtheSunandothergalaxies.TheseareXrays,gamma rays,subatomicparticleslikeprotons,andmagneticplasma.Themagnetosphereofourplanetactsasashield against the particle shower. But some still escape this filter and reach us. The plasma and the radioactive particlesgenerateGeomagneticallyInducedCurrent(GIC)ofaboutoneampereinourlithosphere.
Ionizingradiationfromthesesourcesisthemaindriverofmutationinthebiosphere.
Occasionally,sayonceinahundredyears,theplanetisjoltedwithamassiveeruptionofbilliontonsofparticles inonego.SpaceweatherreferstosuchviolenttransfersofmatterandenergyfromtheSuntotheEarth.Its maindriversare(a)Solarflaresconsistingofgamma,UVandXrays(b)solarprotonevents(SPE)consistingof
33
high energy protons and (c) CoronalMass Ejections (CME)that are clouds of charged plasma with imbedded magneticfield.Solarflarestravelatthespeedoflight.SPEnormallyarrivesonearthwithinhoursofemission, butaneventof2005tookonly15minutes.ThearrivaltimeofCMEvariesfrom18to72hours.Thebiggest spaceweathereventduringthepast450yearsoccurredinSeptember1859.KnownasCarringtonevent,this storm caused widespread disturbance of telegraph across the planet. A magnetograph maintained at the Alibag observatory in Colaba Mumbai is the only scientific documentation available on this. The next major eventhappenedin1921. The1989eventwhichwastentimessmallerthanthe1921eventcausedirreparabledamagetoatransformer attheSalemnuclearpowerplantinNewJersey.InCanada,6millionpeopleservedbyQuebechydropowerlost electricityfor9hours.ImpactofthiswasalsofeltinNorthernEurope.Severalsmallereventsdidoccurduring thesatelliteera.Manyofthosegadgetsupintheskywereeitherdisorientedordamaged.Adetailedaccount ofthespaceweathereventsduringthepastcenturyisavailableatwww.spaceweather.org.
AbigCMEcancauseageomagneticstormasitpuncturesourplanetsmagnetosphere,leadingtoasurgeinthe earths current (upto 100 amperes). When this is communicated to the grid (as a semi DC current), the transformersgetburnt.AnexpertcommitteeofUSNASestimatedthata1921typeeventcandestroy100of 300oddbigtransformersinUS.Leadtimeformanufactureofthistypeoftransformersisoneyearormore. TheNASreportpredictsthatathirdofthegridinUSwillbeaffectedanditmaytakebetweenonetotenyears to reconnect. Besides damaging the high voltage transformers, space weather events can also destroy or disorientthesatellitesimpactingtheglobalcommunicationnetwork.NASApredictsthatabigeventislikelyin SolarCycle24thatisexpectedtopeakin2013. AccordingtoORNL,theprobabilityofsuchaneventhappeningtodayisoneinhundred.Comparethiswithone in10,000chancesofabigfloodDAEisanticipating.
EffectsonLithosphereEarthquakesandVolcanoes
Even more disturbing is recent suggestion that the space weather anomalies can cause volcanoes and earthquakes.Duringthepasttwodecades,severedisturbancesintheionospherewereobserveddaysbefore majorearthquakes.Severalrecentstudieshaveshowncorrelationsbetweensolarstormsandearthquakes.3
34
SevenearthquakesincludingtheSumatratsunami
There were seven solar storms followed by earthquakes during 36 days of NovemberDecember 2004. Anagnostopoulos et al state that our analysis clearly shows that 7 of the 7 solar wind increases observed upstream from the earths bow shock from 23/11/2004 to 28 /12/2004 were followed by one or more M>6 earthquakes(M=7.1,7.0,6.8,6.8,8.1,9.3,respectively)within~1.5days.4
IcelandVolcanoandChinaearthquake2010
In 2010 Iceland's volcano Eyjafjallajokull erupted for the firsttime in 190 years. In a paper presented at the European Planetary Science Congress 2010 BR German makes the following observations: it was registered following(a)thebeginningofamajorsolarwindstorm4April,2010,(b)CMEshitEarth'smagneticfieldon11 April; the impact caused a G2class geomagnetic storm, (c) one of the biggest prominences in years erupted fromtheSunon13April,and(d)asfinal,majorexplosionsoftheEyjafjallajokullvolcanotookplaceandclouds ofashweredriftingacrossEuropeon14April,2010.Inaddition,theearthquakeofthemagnitude7.1occurred inChina.5
GreatEastJapanEarthquakecausedduetosolarstorm?
CMEandresultantgeomagneticdisturbanceswerenotedthreedaysbeforethe9Mearthquakeandtsunamiin EastCoastofJapan.Spaceweather.comnotedinthedailybriefings:Acoronalmassejection(CME)exploded fromthevicinityofsunspot1164duringthelatehoursofMarch7th.Itleaptawayfromthesuntraveling~2200 km/s,makingitthefastestCMEsinceSept.2005.ThisCMEbrushedagainstEarth'smagneticfieldon09Mar 2011. Earth's magnetic field is still reverberating from a CME strike on March 10th.6A causal link between thesetwoeventscannotberuledout,thoughnoscientificpaperhassofarbeenpublished
ImpactofgridfailureonNuclearfacilities
The loss of electricity will impact on all aspects of modern life industry, transport, communication, water supplyandsupplychainsoffoodsandotheressentials.Theimpacts,thoughunthinkable,canbeovercomeby resilientsocietylikethatofours.Therecouldbeminoraccidentsinfactoriesandonroads,butthesearenot likelytohavealastingimpact.
However, the effects of a long term blackout on nuclear facilities like reactors and spent fuel pools will be
35
irreversible.Intheabsenceofthemotivepower,supplyofcoolantstoreactorcoresandtheirspentfuelpools willbestopped.Thiscancausecoremeltdownsandexplosionsleadingtoradiologicalcontaminationofvast areas.TheUSNuclearRegulatoryCommission(NRC)iscurrentlydeliberatingonapetitionbythecivilsociety toensuremotivepowerwithoutdailyinputofresourcesandhumanpresence.
Care of the nuclear cores and spent fuel pools is a problem that will have to be addressed by 30 national governmentswithnucleartechnology.TheycanwaittilltheNRCpetitionisdisposedofforinitiatetheiractions attheirownlevel.TheBritishgovernmenthasindicatedthattheyareawaketotheproblem. Thelongtermsafetyofthenuclearfacilitiesdependsonavailabilityoffreshwaterandamotivepowertopump ittothecoreandthepool.InIndianuclearcampuseslikeTAPSandMAPSdrawtheirfreshwaterfromnatural sourcessome20+kmaway.Insuchcases,motivepowerwillberequiredforpumpingwatertothetoweratthe sourceandatthecampuses.Kudankulamisauniquecase.TheAnuVijayTownshipwithover1000households andthereactorsandthespentfuelpoolsaredependentupondesalinationplantsfortheirfreshwater.Thereis nootherreactor complex inthe worldwhichis totallydependentupon desalination. About 6070MW(e)is requiredtorunthedesalinationplants.KKNPPhasaninstalledwindenergycapacityof7MW(e),whichismore sufficientforrunningthepumps,butnotenoughforkeepingthedesalinationplantsafloat.
As mentioned in the beginning of this note, widespread collapse of the national grid due to severe space weatheranomaliesisaHILFEwithanestimatedprobabilityofonein100years.Assuch,duringthelifetimeof KKNPPreactors,thismayormaynothappen.Thisisnotaproblemofthisprojectalone.Hencetheneedfora nationalpolicy.
Indiaisinasaferpositionthanmanyothernuclearnationsasournuclearshareislessthan4%oftheelectricity andlessthan1%ofthetotalenergyconsumed.
NATURALDISASTERS10+DEATHOR100+ AFFECTEDDURING20TH CENTURY
36
EARTHQUAKES>6.9DURING :18632011 PERYEAR

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
18631900
19011938
19391976
10772011
BasedonapaperpresentedataNationalSeminarinKuvempuUniversityon10Nov2011byVTPadmanabhan
SelectedReferences
http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=09&month=03&year=2011) Electromagnetic Pulse: Effects on the U.S. Power Grid, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 2010 The 23rd Cycle: Learning to live with a stormy star, Odenwald, S. 2001 Univ. Columbia Press. http://www.astronomycafe.net/vita.html Severe Space Weather EventsUnderstanding Societal and Economic Impacts Workshop Report, 2008 Committee on the Societal and Economic Impacts of Severe Space Weather Events: A Workshop, NationalResearch Council http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12507.html http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/29may_noaaprediction/ http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/spaceweather_hazard.html. http://www.choosenuclearfree.net/waste/nuclear-reactors-and-spent-nuclear-fuel
37
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/safer-storage-of-spent-fuel.html Universality in solar flare, magnetic storm and earthquake dynamics using Tsallis statistical mechanics, Georgios Balasis, Ioannis A. Daglis, Anastasios Anastasiadis, Constantinos Papadimitriou b, Mioara Mandeac, Konstantinos Eftaxias, Physica A 390 (2011) 341346 Solar wind triggering of geomagnetic disturbances and strong (M>6.8) earthquakes during the November December 2004 period. G. Anagnostopoulos, A. Papandreou and P. Antoniou , Demokritos University of Thrace, Space Research Laboratory, 67100 Xanthi, Greece, Physica A 390 (2011) 341346 Solar influence on the Tunguska area, Iceland and Alaska B. R. German, Institute of Physics of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, Donetsk, Ukraine (german@mail.fti.ac.donetsk.ua) EPSC Abstracts, Vol. 5, EPSC2010-896, 2010
38
CHAPTER - 7
HEALTH EFFECTS OF LOW LEVEL IONIZING RADIATION
VTPadmanabhan,VPugazhendiandRRamesh
The GovernmentofIndia Expert Groupassertsthatlowlevelradiationdoesnot causeany health risktothe nuclearworkers,downwindersandthedownstreamers.Findingsofthestudiesamongthebombvictimsin Japan,peoplelivinginHighbackgroundradiationregionsinKeralaandTamilNaduandtheradiationworkersin Indiaarequotedasevidences.Thestudiesreferencedforthisassertionwerefundedbyeitherthemilitaryor thenuclearindustry.Studiesbyindependentresearcherspublishedinpeerreviewedjournalsshowdifferent results.
Thisnoteisdividedintosixparts.
PartIGeneralStatementoftheProblemexplainsthattheweaponconnectionisresponsibleforthebiasin the findings of official health studies like the ones done among the bomb victims. Studies funded by the ownersofnuclearfacilitieswillalsobebiasedforreasonsofprofit.Tobaccoindustryneveradmittedthattheir product causes cancer, till independent researchers did their job well. ICRP and all other official radiation committees are filled with experts of weapon establishment or owners of nuclear facilities. An independent riskestimatortheEuropeanCommitteeonRadiationRisks(ECRR)findsthattheofficialriskestimateoflow dosesofionizingradiationismorethanhundredtimeshigherthanthatofICRP.
Part II Genetic Epidemiological Studies in 70,000 people in the coastal villages of Kollam district in Kerala revealsstatisticallysignificantincreaseingeneticdisordersamongchildrenborntoparentswhowerereceiving anaveragedoseof5milliSievertayearfromthethoriumbearingmineralsinthesoil.Summaryofthepaper publishedinInternationalJournalofHealthServices
39
PartIIIFlawedGeneticStudiesintheBombedCities.GeneticstudiesweredesignedbytheUSArmysAtomic BombCasualtyCommissionin1948.Theyincludedagroupexposedtoheavydosesofresidualradiationfrom thefissionproductsandneutronactivationproductsinthecontrol(unexposed)groupinthegeneticstudy.A reviewshowshighaberrationofsexratiooftheoffspringoftheunexposedcontrolgroup.Summaryofapaper presentedataninternationalconferenceonradiationhealthrisks. PartIVSexRatioaberrationamongtheprogeniesofBARCandTAPSbasedontheofficialdataprovidedbythe NPCIL.Therewashighmalenessintheprogeniesborntill1985,whichcouldbeattributedtodominantlethal mutation on the paternal X chromosome of the male employees. Summary of a paper submitted for publication.
PartVPrevalenceofCancerinemployeesandtheirspousesinMAPS,TAPSandBARC.Significantlyhigher prevalenceinolderunits(BARCandTAPS)incomparisontoMAPS.Datasource:NPCIL.Summaryofapaper submittedforpublication.
PartVIADAEfundedstudybyaChennaibasedNGOshowsstatisticallysignificantincreasein10diseasesin peoplelivinginvillageswithin8kmofMAPSincomparisontothoselivingbeyond50kms.Diseasesincludes diabetes,stroke,cancer,mentalretardationandthyroidanomalies.Abriefreportandstatisticalanalysisofthe findings.Datasource:NPCIL.ThisdatawasreleasedtothepressbythemanagersofNPCIL.Aqualitystudy likethisshouldhaveappearedinapeerreviewedjournal.Journalsusuallydonotacceptmaterialsthathave been published earlier. In order to protect the right of the researchers who conducted the study, we are attachingournoteasaseparatedocument,whichisexclusivelyfortheeyesofthegovernmentandshouldbe publicizedinanyformthatwillhamperitsfuturepublicationinaproperjournal.
PART I: GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE OF HEALTH EFFECTS OF LOW LEVEL RADIATION
ThefissiontechnologywasbornintheweaponlaboratoriesoftheManhattanProjectinUSA.Firstamongthe fissionrelated radiation victims were the scientists and the workers of the weapon laboratories. Their ranks were joined by the people of HiroshimaNagasaki. Later on millions of soldiers took part in the 540 atomic bomb tests conducted by the nuclear weapon tests. Because of this weapon connection, health studies of radiationvictimsbeitinJapan,USAorUSSR,weremonopolizedbytheestablishment.Alltheinternational
40
committeeslikeICRP,UNSCEARarefilledwithinhouseexperts.ScientistslikeKarlMorganandJohnGofman whospokeandwroteagainsttheestablishmentwerehoundedout.
PostChernobyl, the situation is changing. Studies by independent researchers published in peerreviewed journalsshowthattherealradiationhealthriskistwoordersofmagnitudehigherthanthatestimatedbythe official committees. These observations are strengthened by the laboratory findings in nanotoxicology and genomicinstability.TheEuropeanCommitteeonRadiationRisks(ECRR)consistingof22scientistsworkingin different areas of epidemiology and radiobiology have been making radiation risk estimates during the past decade.TheirevidencesareincreasinglybeingacceptedbytheCourtsandthepeople. Health effects of IR can be classified intotwo (a) genetic effects and (b) somatic effects. Genetic effects are thosethataremanifestedintheprogenyoftheexposedpersonswhilesomaticeffectsaremanifestedamong theexposedpersons.EffectsofIRarecellular.ExposedcellsmaydieorsurvivewithamutationintheDNA. According to the newest findings, besides the immediate effects, there are also delayed effects of exposure, thatmaymanifestdecadesaftertheexposures.Thisismediatedthroughthechemicalchangesoccurringinthe cell due to the generation of free radicals. Though most of the free radicals are shortlived, they cause to producepersistentchemicals.Animalexperimentsshowthatinjectionofbodyfluidsfromtheexposedanimals intononexposedonecanalsocausemutation.
Since the middle of the last century, all humans and the entire biosphere is subjected to anthropogenic radionuclidesgeneratedintheprocessofnuclearfission.Fissiontechnologyproducesabout600radioactive isotopes. Most biologically significant among them are: (Half life in parenthesis): 14Carbon (5730 years), 3tritium (12.3 years), 131Iodine (8.3 days), 137cesium (30 years) and 90strontium (29 years). Making and testingofatomicbombtestswerethemainsourceofexposuretill1965.Totalexplosiveyieldofallthesetests isequivalentto520milliontonsofTNTequivalent.Toputthisnumberinperspective,thetotalexplosiveyield ofallconventionalexplosivesusedduringtheIIWorldWarwaslessthan10milliontonsofTNT.So,allofus are ingesting the radiocarbon, strontium90, tritium and cesium and about 20 other longlived fission and activationproductsreleasedbytheboysthroughtheirtoys.
Since 1970s the civilian nuclear fuel cycle has been continuing the radiobiological experiment from 200 locations, mostly in the Northern Hemisphere of the planet. Unlike the bombs, the civil nuclear emission is chronic. Every year, the energy fuel cycle fissions about 300 tons of 235 uranium and produce 200 tons of plutoniumand300tonsoffissionproducts.Morethan99%ofthesetoxinsarecontainedinthereactorcores. HermanMuellerinhisexperimentswithfruitfliesin1927demonstratedthationizingradiationismutagenic.
41
He observedthatwhenthemale flieswere exposedtolowdose Xrays,there were fewerfemale progenies. Decades research and experiments convinced him and fellow geneticists that IR is the most potent mutagen introducedbythemodernhumans.InanarticlepublishedintheAmericanJournalofHumanGeneticsin1956, Muellersuggestedtocyropreservethespermoftheyoungmenbeforeenteringradiationjobs.
RadiationestablishmentconsistingoforganizationsliketheInternationalCommissionforRadiationProtection (ICRP), United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) Committee of the US National Academy of Sciences and their national affiliatesin30nuclearcountriesbelievethatIRinducedgeneticeffectshasnotbeendemonstratedinhumans sofar.ThisisbasedonthenilfindingsofgeneticstudiesamongthechildrenborntobombvictimsinJapanand peopleliving inHighBackgroundRadiationRegionsof Kerala, India. Boththeseassertions arenot trueasis evidentfromindependentstudiespublishedinpeerreviewedliterature. Findingsofthefollowingstudiesaresummarizedbelow: (a) GeneticepidemiologicalstudyinKeralaHighBackgroundRadiationRegion2004 (b) ReviewofgeneticstudiesofchildrenofHibakushas2011 (c) StudyofchildrenborntoradiationworkersinBARCandTAPS2011 (d) PrevalenceofcanceramongworkersandtheirfamiliesinBARC,TAPSandMAPS
PART II GENETIC EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY IN KERALA HIGH BACKGROUND RADIATION REGION - 2004
42
About 200,000 people live in highbackground radiation regions (HBRR) in India. Sources of radiation are thorium,uranium,andtheirradioactivedaughterscontainedinthemineralmonazite.Richsurfacedepositsof monazite are found in the coastal districts of Ganjam in Orissa State, Kanyakumari in Tamilnadu State, and Kollam (earlier Quilon) in Kerala State. Other wellknown HBRRs are in China, Brazil, France, Italy, Iran, Madagascar, and Nigeria. Kerala HBRR) is a coastal strip, which is part of four revenue villages: Alapat, Panmana,Chavara,andNeendakara,inKarunagappallitaluk(subdistrict)ofKollamdistrict.Thestripisanisland withNeendakaraandKayamkulamestuariesinthesouthandthenorth,AshtamudiKayamkulambackwatersin theeast,andtheArabianSeainthewest. In 1957, the World Health Organization (WHO) identified the Kerala HBRR (mean background radiation 650 millirad/year(mR/yr))andadjoiningvillagesinanormalradiationregion(NRR)astheidealsettingforstudying theradiationinducedandspontaneousgeneticloadinhumanbeings(4,p.13).In1959,anexpertcommittee ofWHOlaiddownthemethodologyforconductingastudy.ScientistsfromBARCwerepartofthiscommittee. Theydidnotundertakeanystudy.In1975NKochupillaiandcolleaguesfromtheAllIndiaInstituteofMedical Sciences(AIMS)Delhi(12)reportedahigherincidenceofDownsyndromeandseverementalretardationinthe KeralaHBRRinthetopsciencejournaltheNature.AttheendofadebatebetweenBARCandAIMS,theformer agreedtofundadetailedstudyoftheentirepopulationinKeralaHBGR.AIMSsubmittedadetailedproposal andthebudgettoBARC.Nothinghappenedafterthat.
VT Padmanabhanet al conducted that detailed study under the guidance of an International Advisory Board consistingofDrRosalieBertel,DrKarlMorgan,DrAliceSteward,DrPatriciaSheehanandProfSadaoIchhikawa. Thestudypopulationincludedallinhabitantsofthemineralbeltandapopulationlivingincomparablecoastal regionintheadjoiningdistrictofAlapuzha.Thedetailsofthestudyaregivenbelow:
(a) Demographicsurveyofallhouseholdsinwithapopulation38,000inHBRRand32,000inNRR (b) DosimetricsurveyoftheentireHBRRandselectedplacesinNRR (c) Screening of persons reported to be suffering from a genetic disorder or congenital anomaly by trained nursesanddoctors. (d) Chromosomal study of children suffering from mental retardation, other complex syndromes and their parentsatAIMS. (e) DNAstudiesofpatientswithcomplexsyndromesandtheirparentsatAIMS.
43
Thefindingsaresummarizedbelow:
1. 985 persons were found to have heritable anomalies. Suggested etiologies for the anomalies were chromosomalandMendelian, 2. 15percent;multifactorial,60percent;andcongenital,25percent. 3. There was a statistically significant increase of Down syndrome, autosomal dominant anomalies, and multifactorial diseases and an insignificant increase of autosomal recessive and Xlinked recessive anomaliesintheHBRR. 4. Thetotalfertilityratewas3.85percouple;9percentoflivebornchildrenwerereporteddead.Therateof untowardpregnancyoutcomedeathoftheoffspringorpresenceofananomalyinalivingchildwas6.4 percent among the unrelated couples in the NRR, with one spouse born outside the area of current residence(migrant).Consideringthisasthebase,theexcessrelativerisksintheothergroupsare:NRR nonmigrant,35percent;HBRRnonmigrant,69percent;NRRconsanguineous,76percent;andHBRR consanguineous,157percent.
5. Ionizingradiation,consanguinity,andnearnessofbirthplaceofthespouseareriskfactorsforthedeathof offspringandforanomalies.Thehigherriskamongthenonmigrantcouplesmaybeduetogeographic inbreeding.
6. The findings are suggestive of an autosomal recessive etiology for the majority of the multifactorial anomalies.
Source:
V. T. Padmanabhan, A. P. Sugunan, C. K. Brahmaputhran, K. Nandini, and K. Pavithran Heritable Anomalies Among The Inhabitants Of Regions Of Normal And High Background Radiation In Kerala: Results Of A Cohort Study, 19881994, International Journal of Health Services, Volume 34, Number 3, Pages 483515, 2004
44
PART - III
REVIEW OF GENETIC STUDIES OF CHILDREN BORN TO PARENTS EXPOSED TO ATOM BOMBS IN HIROSHIMA IN AUGUST 1945

INTRODUCTION
In August 1945 two fission devices exploded in the morning skies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the brightnessofathousandSunsandexplosiveenergyequivalentto36,000tonsofTNT.1.Thesegeneratedheat blastandionizingradiations(IR).ThesourcesofIRweregammarays(photons),neutrons,neutronactivation products(NAP),fissionproducts(FP),andmicro/nanoparticlesofunfissioned235uranium(235U)and239plutonium (239Pu). The photons and neutrons caused prompt exposure within seconds in an area witha radius of about 2,500metersofthehypocenters(OTH).RadioactiveparticleslikeNAP,FPandparticlesunfiussioneduranium andplutoniumcontaminatedthesoilandwaterbodiesandthefoodweb.Besidestheexternalradiation,these werealsosourcesofchronicinternalradiationthroughinhalationandingestion.NAPsareradioactivespecies like 14carbon and 3tritium formed when neutrons interact with the nuclei of stable atoms of nitrogen and hydrogen.Outof50kgofenricheduraniuminthecoreofHiroshimabomb,only855gramswerefissioned.Out ofanestimated15kgofPuintheNagasakibomb1.2kgwasfissioned.Fissionproductsarenanoparticleswith radioactivehalflivesrangingfromsecondstomillionsofyears.FPyieldswere4.35x1024atomsinHiroshimaand 6.09x1024 atoms in Nagasaki. The estimated yields of NAP were about half that of the FP. Within an hour of detonation,partofthebombdebriscontainingradioactiveparticlesfellintheoutskirtsofthecitiesandtherest wasloftedtothestratosphere.TheseparticleswerefoundintheicecoredrilledfromtheArcticicecapsaswell asinthesamplesofsoil,sediment,andtreeringsfromfalloutareasinJapan.HiroshimaNagasakieventshave beenbilledasthefirstmajorglobalcirculationexperiment.2
Thegeneticeffectsofionizingradiationcanbemanifestedintwoways.Theseare(a)anincreaseinanomalies linkedtogenemutationamongtheoffspringoftheexposedparentsand(b)changeinsexratiooftheoffspring. While exposure of both female and male parents will cause an increase in anomalies among their offspring, exposurelinkedsexratiochangeswillbedifferentforexposuresoffemaleandmalerespectively.Ifthefathers
45
are exposed, there will be a deficit of female among their offspring, while mothers exposure will lead to a deficitofgirls.Studyofsexratiocanbedonebyanybodyandcostsverylittle.Atthesametime,studiesof geneticdisordersamongchildrenrequirehighlyskilledprofessionalsandhightechnology.Consideringthis,the WorldhealthOrganizationandtheJournalofAmericanMedicalAssociationsuggestedtoundertakesexratio studiesamongchildrenborntoparentsexposedtoradiationandothermutagens.
In1965Schullet.alsummarizedtheresultsof16studiesof13,511childrenconceivedafterexposures.6Ineight ofthese,themothersandintheremainingeightthefatherswereexposedattheworkplacesorintheclinics. When compared with the national birth SR, the findings in 14 studies were pro genetic theory, ie there was deficitofgirlswhenfatherswereexposedanddeficitofboyswhenmotherswereexposed.Inrecenttimes, changeinSRhasbeenobservedinchildrenofworkersoftheplutoniumprocessingplantatSellafield7andin Chernobyl contaminated Europe8. In view of the increasing threat to the genome from environmental mutagens,DavisetalsuggestedthatbirthSRbetreatedasasentinelhealthindicator.9
ABCC study of 70,212 children born during 194853, showed a male deficit in exposed mothers offspring (p <0.05) and female deficit in exposed fathers offspring.10 Since these findings were progenetic theory, the secondphaseSRstudywasconductedduring195462.Thereportoftheextendedstudyof140,252children bornduring194862waspublishedin1965.6Thelastreportofthisstudypublishedin1981afterarevisionin dosimetry concluded that the results of 194853 and 195462 were opposite in direction and the positive effectsreportedearlierwasfortuitousandirrelevantfortheradiationdebate.11,12
Comparison of the reports published in 1965 and 1981reveals sex selective changes in database in the 1981 report.During194853,therewere70,212births(SR=1,078)in1965reportand70,082births(SR=1075)in 1981report.103boysand27girlsweremissinginthe1981report.TotalbirthandSRduringPhaseIIwere 70,330(SR=1,071)in1965reportand72,902(SR=1,100)in1981report.Inthe1981report,1819boysand753 girlswereaddedtothedatabase.Totalchildreninthedatabaseforbothphasesaccordingto1965reportwere 140,542andSRwas1,074.Thenumberincreasedto142,984andSRincreasedto1,088in1981report.Since thenumbergivenintwosubsequentreviewsauthoredbyNeelandSchullin199113andNakamurain200614is 140,542,itseemsthatthe1981datawasincorrect.Thedataerrorandtheconclusionsof1981reporthavenot beencorrectedsofar.
Results
A reanalysis of the data as published in 1965 shows a statistically significant deficit of females among the progenyoftheunexposedcontrolgroup.About5000menwhowerenotintheircitiesatthetimeofbombs,
46
butreenteredthecitiesduringthefirstweekaftertheeventswereincludedintheunexposedgroup.These early entrants were exposed to residual radiations and were considered as bomb victims by the Japanese government in 1957. The US military scientists who designed all the health studies in the bombed cities included the residually exposed persons in the \unexposed group to mask the health effects in the exposed groups.
Source: VT Padmanabhan, Underestimation of genetic and somatic effects of ionizing radiation among the A-bomb survivors in Fukushima and Health: What to Expect, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, May 5th/6th 2009, Lesvos, Greece , Edited by Chris Busby, Joseph Busby, Ditta Rietuma and Mireille de Messieres. Printed and published by Green Audit ISBN: 978-1897761-17-5
PART - IV HIGHER PROPORTION OF MALE IN CHILDREN OF INDIAN NUCLEAR WORKERS

TheEpidemiologicalStudiesCelloftheTataMemorialCentre,Mumbai(TMC)publisheddetailsofchildrenborn tothepermanentworkersindifferentatomicenergyunitsinIndiaunderaconsultancyservicecontractfrom the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL). Children born to workers of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre(BARC)during195594andTarapurAtomicPowerStation(TAPS)during197094arethesubjectsinthis study.
LocatedinTrombay,60kmsouthofMumbai,intheStateofMaharashtra,BARCisthepremiernuclearresearch centre in India, involved in production of fissile materials, bomb designs and research on all stages in the nuclearfuelchainssince1955.BARChousessixresearchreactors,auraniumfuelfabricationunit,athorium millforconversionofthoriumhydroxideintometalandplantsforseparating 239plutoniumand 233uraniumfrom thespentfuel.Besidestheseradiationfacilities,thereareplantsthatsynthesizeandenrichrarechemicalsand elementsusedinthenuclearbombs.
47

Tarapur,100kmnorthofMumbaionthecoastofArabianSeahousesIndiasfirstcommercialnuclearreactors importedfromUSAthatbecamecriticalin1969.ThecampushastwoBoilingWaterReactors(BWR)eachwitha design capacity of 210 MW(e), a plant for separating plutonium from the spent fuel, a unit for making plutoniumuraniummixedoxidefuelandahighlevelradioactivewasteimmobilizationplant.
3)Results
As of 1994, there were 22,196 workers, 16,616 spouses and 31,569 offspring in these two units. For BARC children, data is available for 5 year periods. During 195594, radiation workers (RW) and nonradiation workers(NRW)ofBARCgavebirthto4,206and22,885childrenrespectively.OSRsinceinceptionto1994was 1,147forRWand1,142forNRW.OSRwasabove1500before1970inboththecohortsandhasbeendeclining steadily since then. Since 1985, both the cohorts are maledeficit. As the offspring SRB of RW and NRW is similar, theirdata has been combinedand disaggregated as pre1985 and post1984 cohorts(Table 1). Total birthduring195584was17,669,OSRwas1,205andtheproportionmalewas0.547.During198594,there were 9,392 births, OSR and proportion male was 1,034 and 0.508 respectively. The difference between the periods is significant (df=1, chi sq= 35.91, p=0000). Periodized data is not available for TAPS. Unlike that in BARC,thereisdifference inSRofoffspringofRWandNRW inTAPS. RW andNRWin TAPS sired3,019and 1,459childrenrespectively(Table2).OSRofRWandNRWis1,191and1,010andproportionmaleis0.544and 0.502respectively.Thedifferenceissignificant(df=1,chisq=6.69,p=0.0097).
Foranalysis, thechildrenhavebeenplacedinfourgroupsonthebasisofyearofbirthinBARCandpaternal exposurestatusinTAPSas:(a)bornduring195585inBARC,(b)bornduring198694inBARC,(c)childrenof RWofTAPSand(d)childrenofNRWofTAPS.
Proportionmaleincohort(a)is0.547(95%CI=0.53910.5538).Thisdifferenceissignificantfromthereference proportionof0.515inurbanMumbai.(df=1,chisq=68.93,p=0.0000).Likewisetheproportionmaleincohort (c)is54.36%(95%CI=52.5656.14,df=1,chisq=10,p=0.00165).Thedifferencebetweencohorts(b)and(d) andthereferencepopulationisnotsignificant. Inboththeunitsunderstudy,therearesignificantdeviationsinSRBinthedirectionofgeneticexpectation.A shiftinoffspringSRcannotunequivocallyprovethepastparentalexposureandmutation.Suchstudiescanat best help us to formulate the hypothesis. Analysis of all the births in other DAE units and a detailed genetic epidemiologicalstudyseekingseveralothergeneticendpointswillgoalongwayinourunderstandingofthe impactofchroniclowdoseexposuretogammaphotonsandfissionnanoparticlesonthegenome.
48

DataSources: Dinshaw, Notani and Talole, 2001, Effects of Low-Dose Ionising Radiation among the Employees at the Kalpakkam DAE Community: A Cross-sectional Study, Tata Memorial Centre. 2001 Dinshaw KA, Notani PN, Sachdev MR, Effects of Low-Dose Ionising Radiation among the Employees at the Tarapur DAE Community: A Cross-sectional Study, Tata Memorial Centre, 1999 NOTE:Thisisasummaryofapapersubmittedforpublication.
PART V
PREVALENCE OF CANCER AMONG WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN INDIA
VTPadmanabhan*
Indiahasafullfledgednuclearfuelchainwithover100,000scientists,techniciansandworkersontheroll.If theirfamiliesarealsoincluded,therewillbewelloverhalfamillionpersonsintheatomicenergycommunity. AfewpaperspublishedbythescientistsfromtheDepartmentofAtomicEnergy(DAE)showthatthereisno excessriskofcanceramongtheworkersandtheirfamilies.Thispaperreviewsdataonprevalenceofcancerin (a) Madras Atomic Power Station, (b) Tarapur Atomic Power Station and Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC).TheyearofcriticalityofnuclearreactorswasMAPS1985,TAPS1970andBARC1956.Prevalenceof cancerper100,000personsis92,161and337amongmaleworkersand195,358,and518amongtheirwives inMAPS,TAPSandBARCrespectively.OddsRatioinTAPSandBARCfortheworkersis1.75and3.69(Chisquare 8.79,p.003)andforthewivesis1.83and2.66(Chisquare6.68,p=0.013)ThelowerprevalenceinMAPS maybeattributabletobetteroccupationalandenvironmentalhygienethantheolderunitscommissionedthree decadesago.
DataSources: Dinshaw, Notani and Talole, 2001, Effects of Low-Dose Ionising Radiation among the Employees at the Kalpakkam DAE Community: A Cross-sectional Study, Tata Memorial Centre. 2001 Dinshaw KA, Notani PN, Sachdev MR, Effects of Low-Dose Ionising Radiation among the Employees at the Tarapur DAE Community: A Cross-sectional Study, Tata Memorial Centre, 1999
49
CHAPTER - 8
PEOPLE LIVING NEAR KALPAKAM NUCLEAR COMPLEX HAVE HIGHER DISEASE BURDEN - A NEW OFFICIAL STUDY
VPugazhendi,MaryConrad,RRameshandVTPadmanabhan
IMPORTANTNOTICE:
DrManjulaDattaandcolleaguesconductedahealthsurveyamongthepeoplelivinginproximateanddistant villages of the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS). The study was funded by the Department of Atomic Energy(DAE),GovernmentofIndiaandconductedthroughanNGO,ASPIRE.Areportofthestudyconsistingof raw(unanalyzed)datawasreleasedtothepresslastmonthbythemanagersatMAPS.Themanagersreiterated thatthestudyshowsthattheoperationofnuclearreactorsatKalpakkamhasnotcausedanyhealthproblemin thenearbyvillages.ThePrincipalInvestigatororanyexpertassociatedwiththestudywasnotpresentatthe pressconference.
Resultsofscientificstudiesaretobepublishedinpeerreviewedjournals.Ifthefindingsareseriousenough warranting immediate remedial action, they can be communicated to the government or to the courts. By releasing the data to the press unilaterally, the managers of NPCIL have violated the Helsinki Principles and otherinternationalguidelinesonhumanhealthstudies.Thedatabelongtothepeoplewhoparticipatedinthe study,thescholarsareitscustodians.Donorsdonotowndata.
Inviewofthetopicalimportanceofthisstudyinthecurrentsituationwitharagingcontroversyoverthesafety of nuclear power plants, we have analyzed the data released by NPCIL. Our analysis and comments are exclusivelyintendedforthegovernmentagenciesandtheexpertswhoaredebatingthesafetyofKudankulam andothernuclearprojectsinthecountry.Nopartofthisnoteshouldbepublicizedinanyform.
50
Introduction
In 2008 we conducted a study of thyroid anomalies among 3,520 women living in three coastal villages that were6,40and400kmsouthoftheMadrasAtomicPowerStation(MAPS).Wefoundastatisticallysignificant excessofgoiterandautoimmunethyroiditis(AIT)invillages6and40kmfromincomparisonwiththevillage located400km.
GOITERAT5,40,400KMSKALPAKAM
25.0
20.0
15.0 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM05 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM40 10.0 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM400
5.0
0.0 1519 2029 3039 4049 50+ AllAges
AUTOIMMUNETHYROIDISM KALPAKAM
8 7 6
PercentPrevalence KM06 PercentPrevalence KM40 PercentPrevalence KM400
0 20 29 30 39 40 49 Allages
51
Sinceoursamplesizewassmallandwelookedatonlyoneorgan(rathergland),wemadeamodestclaimthat theobservedexcessesintheproximatevillagesmaybeattributedtoroutinereleaseofradioactiveiodine,other fissionproductsandtritiumfromtheMAPSreactorsandtheplutoniumprocessingplants. TheDepartmentofAtomicEnergy(DAE)oftheGovernmentofIndiacommissionedASPIRE, aChennaibased NGOtoconductadetailedhealthsurveyin25villages.Ofthese22villagesarewithin8km(proximate)and3 are beyond 50 km (distant) of MAPS. Preliminary report of the study without any statistical analysis was released by MAPS in October2011. Total population coverage is 22345 and 6932 in proximate and distant villagesrespectively.Datahasbeentabulatedfor18diseases.ForParkinsonsdisease,Hansensdiseaseand polionocasewasfoundinthedistantvillages.Thecaseloadwas1,765and135andtheprevalencewas79and 20per1,000peopleinproximateanddistantvillagesrespectively.
WehaveanalyzedtheASPIREdatausingtheStatcalcfeatureofEPI6softwaredevelopedbytheWorldHealth OrganizationandtheCenterforDiseaseControl,Atlanta.Differencebetweenproximateanddistantvillagesis significantinthecaseoftendiseases.Detailsaregivenintablebelow:
Theoddsratio(OR)intheproximatevillagesfor alldiseasescombinedis4.5. Inotherwords,thereis350% excess morbidity in people living close to the reactor complex. Within individual diseases, OR for mental retardationis11.5,diabetesandcanceris7.5andthyroidanomaliesis5.02. This study based on a larger sample confirms our findings based on a smaller sample and a single endpoint. Oursamplewasdrawnfromthecoastalcommunities,whereasthisstudyincludescommunitiesfrominterior villagesalso.
NotCancerAlone
Whilediscussingthehealtheffectsofionizingradiation,thefocushasgenerallybeenoncancer.Atthecellular level,radiationcausesmutationofDNA.Sincegenesaretheblueprintforthecellfunctions,mutationofanyof the 30,000 estimated genes in the human genome can impact the human health. Of late, independent researchersfromEurope,NorthAmericaandJapanhavereportedincreasedincidenceofdiseasesotherthan canceralsoamongtheexposedpeople.AreanalysisofthemortalitydataofbombsurvivorsinJapan(paper underpublication)showsexcessmortalityduetononcancerousdiseasesalso.
On this count, this study by Datta et al is the mother of all studies. Common diseases like diabetes, lumps, thyroidanomaliesandcataractaretheonesthatareonthetopoftheirlistfromtheproximatevillages.Atthe
52
sametime,canceraccountsforonly3%ofthetotaldiseaseburden.
NotDownwindersalone
Dattaetalsstudypopulationconsistsofpeoplewhoaregenerallyknownasdownwinders.Theemployeesof the nuclear campus and their families, comprising about 20,000 people live in Kalpakkam Atomic Township, which is located with 6 km of the MAPS stacks. There is no data on the health status of that population. Prevalence of cancer in this study is 210 and 30 per 100,000 people in proximate and distant villages respectively. An earlier analysis of data provided by the Tata Memorial Cancer Centre revealed that the prevalenceofcanceramongthewivesofMAPSworkerswas195per100,000whichisclosertotheprevalence inproximatevillages.
DiseaseSpectruminProximateandDistantVillages MadrasAtomicPowerPlant(Maps),Kalpakam
Diseases Diabetes Lumps ThyroidAnom MR Infertility Cancer Stroke Cataract Ulcer TB Totalcases Total population 594 342 336 74 55 48 41 186 43 46 1765 22345 Near villages Cases Per 1000 people 27.0 15.3 15.0 3.3 2.5 2.1 1.8 8.3 1.9 2.1 79.0 25 45 21 2 5 2 3 27 4 1 135 6932 Distant Villages Cases Per 1000 people 4.0 6.5 3.0 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.4 3.9 0.6 0.1 19.5 Odds Chi 133.85 30.84 62.34 17.53 7.01 9.67 8.9 13.8 5.18 10.93 286.83 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.0081 0.0018 0.0029 0.0002 0.022 0.0009 0.00000 p Confidence Interval
Ratioin Square Near
villages 7.54 2.38 5.02 11.51 3.41 7.46 5.28 2.15 3.32 14.3 4.54
Lower Upper 4.98 1.72 4.96 2.78 1.37 1.78 1.59 1.41 1.20 1.97 3.74 11.52 3.29 7.71 46.75 8.52 44.36 21.59 3.29 9.29 103.5 5.53
53
Note:MR=MentalRetardation,TB=Tuberculosis,ThyroidAnom=Thyroidanomalies WithinlessthanamonthofthereleaseofthereportbyNPCIL,anonymousexpertshavestartedtheirgossips to discredit the study. Sources in the DAE told DNA that a probe is being held soon about the results of surveyspublishedbycertainNGOsaroundKalpakkam.Intelligenceagencieshavecomeacrossinstanceslike cancerpatientsbeingbroughtfromotherareasandmadetostayaroundKalpakkamtocreateanimpression thattheareaisfullofsuchpatientsix About30millionpeoplelivewithinthelocalareaofnuclearinstallationsinthiscountry.Studiesbyindependent scholarshaveshownexcessrisksimilartothatobservedinthisstudyinpeoplelivingneartheUraniummines andmillsinJadugudaandRajasthanAtomicPowerStationinRawathbhatta.Recently,electedleadersofthe Panchayats around the Kaiga Generating Station have complained of an epidemic of cancer and genetic disordersintheirvillageswhichtheyattributedtotheroutinereleaseofradionuclides.Itisincumbentonthe NuclearPowerCorporationofIndiatoprovidequalityhealthcareservicestoallpeoplelivingwithinaradiusof 40kmfromtheplant.Prospectivediseasemonitoringshouldalsobepartofthepackageandthedatashould bemadeavailabletotheresearchcommunity. V. Pugazhenthi, Mary Conrad, R. Ramesh, V.T. Padmanabhan, Prevalence of goiter and autoimmune thyroid disorder In the local area of Madras Atomic Power Station, India - Results of a cross sectional epidemiological study (Under publication)
1
Manjula Datta et al, 2011, Health Studies in Proximate and Distant villages of MAPS, Kalpakkam
VT Padmanabhan, Prevalence of cancer among the workers and their spouses in Atomic Energy establishment in India (Unpublished) 4 Anti-Kudankulam movement on the wane Tuesday, Nov 29, 2011, 8:00 IST , By DNA Correspondent | Agency: DNA
54
A NOTE ON ATOMIC ENERGY IN INDIA

SuvratRaju
Overthepastfewyears,thequestionofnuclearenergyhasoccupiedcenterstageinIndiaspolity.In2005,the ManmohanSinghgovernmentandtheBushadministrationinitiatedanIndoUSnucleardeal.WithinIndia,the dealwasprojectedasameansofhelpingthecountryattainitsrightfulplaceasagreatpower.However,as exploredbelowitcontainedverylittleoftangiblebenefittothecountry.Instead,itservedtotiethecountryto astrategicvisionwhichwouldbringitclosertotheWestandtakeitawayfromitstraditionalpolicyofnon alignment.
Sincethisvisionalthoughpreferredbysectionsofthecountryscorporateandpoliticalelitewouldhardly find broad political support, the government sold the deal as being essential for energy. For example, Sonia GandhitheheadoftherulingCongresspartyexplainedthatelectricitywasrequiredfordevelopmentand thenucleardealwasrequiredforelectricity.Consequently,opponentsofthedealwereenemiesofprogress anddevelopment.
TheIndianDepartmentofAtomicEnergy(DAE)producedvariousdubiousfigurestobacktheseclaims.Asthe debatearoundthedealreachedaclimaxin2008,theheadoftheDAE,AnilKakodkar,preparedapresentation projectingthat,withthehelpofthenucleardeal,atomicenergyinIndiawouldgrowbyafactorof150from about4.12GWto650GWby2050.TheIndiandefenceminister,PranabMukherjee,usedthesefiguresinthe concludingparliamentarydiscussionontheissue,explainingthatwithoutthedeal,ourenergydeficitwould be4,12,000megawatts.Nuclearpowerwouldreducethedeficit...toonly7000megawattsandhencesolve theenergycrisis.
Unfortunately,whiletheDAEhaspromisedtoendtheenergycrisisthroughmassivenuclearexpansionsseveral timesinthepast,ithasasordidrecordofkeepingitspromises.HomiBhabha,thefirstsecretaryoftheDAE, announcedin1962thatinstalledcapacitywouldbe1820GWby1987.Alas,by1987,theDAEsucceededin installing only 1.06 GWabout 5% of Bhabha's predictions. Vikram Sarabhai, who succeeded Bhabha, admittedthattheprogramhasslippedbadlyinrelationtotargetsandsaidthatwehaveaformidabletask toprovideanewatomicpowerstationofapproximately500MWcapacityeachyearafter197273.Infact, Indias first 500 MW reactorTarapur 4went online in 2005, almost 35 years later. Anil Kakodkar, who gloriouslypredicteda150foldexpansionby2050,alsopredictedin2003thatinaboutfouryearsfromnow, DAEwillreachaninstalledcapacityof6800Mwe.Eightyearslater,theDAE'snuclearcapacityisonly4780 MW.
55
Not only has the DAE failed to produce energy on a large scale, but the little it has produced has not been economicallycompetitive.AdetailedstudybyRamana,DSa,andReddyshowedthat,whenvarioussubsidies aretakenintoaccount,nuclearpowerproducedinIndiasindigenousplantsisnotcostcompetitivewithcoal evenfor(real)discountratesaslowas3percent.
Thegovernmentplanstouseitsnewfoundaccesstointernationalnuclearmarketstoimportvariousreactors. However,thesepromisetobeevenmoreexpensive.Thefirstsetofplantstobeinstalledundertheaegisofthe nuclear deal are a set of European Pressurized Reactors (EPRs) designed by the French company Areva. The governmentisplaningamassivenuclearcomplexinJaitapur(Maharashtra),whereitwillputtogether6EPRs withatotalcapacityofalmost10,000MW.ItisratherstrangethattheIndiangovernmenthassuchambitious plansinvolvingtheEPR,sincenotasinglesuchreactorisincommercialoperationanywhereintheworld.Both EPRscurrentlyunderconstructiononeinOlkiluoto(Finland)andtheotherinFlamanville(France)areyears behindscheduleandheavilyovertheiralreadyexorbitantbudgets.Thelatestestimatesfortheirconstruction costsarearound8billionUSD.Itishardtoimaginethatwithsuchheavycapitalcosts,thesereactorswillbe evenclosetocompetitiveinIndia.
The other problem is that the local people of Jaitapur are determined in their opposition to this nuclear complex.Accordingtomediareports,ofthe2,375familieseligibleforcompensation,only114haveaccepted thepackageofferedbythegovernment.WhenMaharashtrasChiefMinistervisitedJaitapurinFebruary,he wasrebuffedbyalargenumberofprotestors.
Thegovernmentsresponsetotheseprotestshasbeenrepressive.InDecember2010,oneactivistdiedwhen hemysteriouslymetwithanaccidentinvolvingapolicejeep.InApril2011,anotheractivistdiedinpolicefiring, and a yatrafrom TarapurtoJaitapurledbyactivistsandseveral eminentcitizenswasblocked bythepolice. Several others, including the sarpanch of Madban, a village close to the proposed reactor site, have been served notices asking them to leave the area. According to media reports, Narayan Rane, a former chief ministerofMaharashtra,threatenedactivistsfromneighbouringdistricts,saying,Nooutsiderwhocomesto Jaitapurtoopposetheprojectwillreturn!
Similarprotestshavestartedatothersiteswherethegovernmentplanstoplantthefruitsofthenucleardeal, includingthetwositesthathavebeenreservedforUSmadereactorsKovvadainAndhraPradeshandMithi Virdi in Gujarat. In Mithi Virdi, local villages are closely monitoring roads leading to the area, to keep governmentsurveyorsfromenteringtheterritory.AtKovvada,accordingtomediareports,anavyhelicopter crewwasconfrontedbyfisherfolkwhowereundertheimpressiontheywerefromtheDAE.
56
These protests only gained momentum after the disaster in Fukushima. However, the government has repeatedlyclarifiedthatitwillignoretheseexpressionsofpopularwill.Infact,asconcernsaboutthenuclear expansion gathered steam, the government held an important meeting on 26 April 2011 the 25th anniversary of Chernobylinvolving Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chief Minister of Maharashtra, and severalotherseniormembersofhisgovernment,andreiterateditsdeterminationtoforgeaheadwithoutany changeofplans.
Oneofthemajorconcernsofthelocalpeoplehastodowithsafety,butthegovernmentdismissesthis.Very recently,inAugust2011,thePrimeMinisterexplainedinparliamentthattherewasnoreasontoworryabout thesafetyofIndiannuclearfacilities,whichareworldclass.Itishardtotakethisatfacevalue,giventhat afterFukushima,theheadoftheDAEexplainedthattherewasnoneedtolinkthedisastertonuclearsafetyat allsincewhathadhappenedwaspurelyachemicalreactionandnotanuclearemergency.
In fact, the government of India is well aware, as are nuclear manufacturers, that their plants can undergo massiveaccidents.Thisiswhyitspentseveralmonthsin2010keepingasidealmostallotherlegislativework intheparliamentframinganuclearliabilitylawthatwouldprotecttheinterestsofmultinationalsuppliersin the event of an accident. The major feature of this bill is that it prevents Indian victims from filing compensation claims against nuclear suppliers. These claims must be directed towards the Indian company that operates the plants, buteven the liability of the operator is limited to Rs. 1,500 crores(about USD 300 million). This isabsurdly low comparedtoestimates of thedamagethatwillbe causedbyaFukushimatype accident,whichrunintohundredsofbillionsofdollars.
WhywouldtheIndiangovernment,giventhehistoryoftheBhopaldisaster,expendpoliticalcapitalinpassinga law that takes away a fundamental right of Indian citizens and protects multinational suppliers from the consequenceofanaccidentinoneoftheirreactors?Whodoesthislawbenefit?
The answer was laid out by Robert Blake, a senior official in the US State Department, who sternly told the IndianGovernmentinMay2010thattheUSexpectedIndiatopasslegislationconsistentwiththeConvention onSupplementaryCompensation(CSC)sincethiswouldprovideaveryimportantlegalprotectionandopen thewayforbillionsofdollarsinAmericanreactorexportsandthousandsofjobs[inAmerica].Fourdayslater, IndiasForeignMinisterSMKrishnagenuflectedinfrontoftheUSIndiaBusinessCouncil,assuringitthatThe Government[ofIndia] iscommittedtoputinplaceanuclearliability regime...[and]welook forwardto US companiesinvestinginIndia.
57
InfactitisthisdesiretopleasetheUSandotherWesterncountriesatanycostthatexplainstheManmohan Singh governments actions in favour of nuclear energy. A close reading of the governments statements revealsaclearunderstandingofthisprocess.Forexample,writingforSakaalTimes,inMarathi,AnilKakodkar candidly explained, we also have to keep in mind the commercial interests of foreign countries and of the companiesthere...America,RussiaandFrancewerethecountriesthatwemademediatorsintheseeffortsto lift sanctions, and hence, for the nurturing of their business interests, we made deals with them for nuclear projects.
Evidently, this nurturing of foreign business interests has been so important to the Manmohan Singh government that it has been more than willing to sacrifice the rights of its citizens. Hence, the question of nuclear energy in India is, at its heart, a political question. The ruling Congress party and even the major oppositionBhartiyaJantaPartyshareavisioninwhichIndiawillrisetodominanceinSouthAsia,withAmerican help,andbyfulfillingtheAmericanneedforacounterweighttoChina.Theplannednuclearexpansion,which involves the purchase of billions of dollars of Western reactors, ties India up into Westerncontrolled fuel marketsandservesasasymbolicflagshipforthisvision.However,itisclearthattheendofthisroaddoesnot involve Indias emergence as a great power but rather as a subordinate client state. While this status certainlyholdsbenefitsforasmallbutinfluentialminorityofthepopulation,itcomesatatremendouscostto theIndianpeople.Arrayedagainstthisvisionarethevariouspeoplesresistancemovements,includingthose thatareworkingtostoptheIndiannuclearexpansion.Iftheysucceed,theywillnotonlywinalocalvictorybut take an important step towards articulating an alternate vision for Indiaone that rejects capitalist and imperialistdominanceandisinsteadbasedonequityandrepresentativedemocracy.
58
COMPILED REPORT
Dr. R.S. Lalmohan
1.Localemployementopportunities
The Govt expert group has not mentioned a single word about the employees working in the Koodankulam plant from other states. It is a open secret that thousands of construction workers and unskilled and semi skilledlabourersfromotherstatesareworkingintheplant.Buttheexpertcommitteemakesafalsestatement that only people of Tamilnadu from Koodankulam, Chettikulam, Idinthakarai, Radhapuram, Tirunelveli and KanyakumariemployeesareworkinginKoodankulampowerplant.
2.VVER1000reactors
VVER1000,V320,arenotsafereactorsthoughtheyarecalledas3rdgenerationreactors.Thehistoricrecords show that 5 VVER 440 in Greifswald Germany were dismantled and decommissioned before the stipulated time.LikewiseanotherVVER210inRheinsbergEastGermanywasdismantledafter24yearsofservicefrom 1966 to 1990. Yet another VVER1000 (4x1000) Mega watts in Stendal, East Germany was never activated though 85% of the work was completed. This shows that VVER1000 reactors are not Trust worthy as mentionedbyCentralGovtexpertcommittee.EveninVVER1000reactortheelectricalcomponentsaremade andfittedbytheSeimanscompanyfromGermany.
3.Decommissioning
Thedecommissioninganddismantlingisverycostly.TheExelonZion1&2PWRWestinghouse,USA1040MWe wasdismantledatthecostof900million$perKwecostingRs.45000000000(45000x10tothepower6).Itis theratein1989before22years.Nowthecostwillbemuchhigher.Hencethecostofdecommissioningofthe Koodankulam reactor will be about 45000 crores about 3 times the cost of construction according to the websiteinformationondecommissioning.Furtherwehavenoexpertiseondecommissioningaswehavenot decommissioned a single reactor so for. We have not also formed a Nuclear Reactor Decommissioning Authority as in UK, USA or France. We have not calculated the amount of electricity required for decommissioning. The decommissioning and defueling will take not less than 10 years. Also the expert committeehasnotmentionedaboutthedisposalofthousandsoftonsofthedismantledreactorwhichwillbe radioactive.Wherewearegoingtodumpthisradioactivewaste?Inshortwehavenottakenintoconsideration orgivenseriousthoughtaboutdecommissioning.
59
4.Radiationsafety
ItisstatedthatradiationsafetyofKKNPPisguaranteed.Butaccordingtothepresentknowledgethereisno minimum dose of radiation for the well being of the human beings. A low radiation of 100m rem may cost cancerinsomepeople.Thereisnostandarddoseforcancer.Thesafedoseforonepersonmaynotbesafefor anotherperson.Radiationisalwayscarcinogenicinhumanbeings.Manydocumentaryevidencesarethereto provethis.Theradiationcancausecongenicialdeformities,reductioninspermcount,downsyndrome,heart diseases,multiplemyloma,andbloodcancer.Accordingtothenewspaper(IndianExpress30.11.2011)report theDirectoroftheFukushimareactorisseriouslyillduetotheradiationexposure.Theradiationmaynotkilla person immediately but the expression of the symptoms of radiation may take even 1520 years. There are reports that the population in an around the Nuclear reactors suffer from radiation related diseases in large numbers. (Eco Science, Paul R.Ehrlich, Annie H.Ehrlich, John P.Holden W.H.Freeman and Company, San Franscisco,1977)
Hencenobodycandenythatradiationisahealthhazard.MadamCurie,thefounderofRadiumdiedofcancer duetoradiation.
5.Peoplesafetyandwellbeing
AccordingtoRasmussenreport(USA)nearly3300deathareportedduring1yearonaestimatedpopulationof 10millionpeople.TheU.SEnvironmentalProtectionagencystateitisalowestimate.Therearemanystudiesto statethatcancerdeathinUSAis3peopleper10,000annually.
6.Effectofradiationonthegenes
ItisawellknownfactthatRNA(RiboNuclicacid)&DNA(DeoxyNuclicacid),mutateduetoradiation.Ithas beenwelldemonstratedintheDrosophilafliesnearly6070years.Theradiationdisturbtheaminoacidchainin theDNAresultinginvariousdeformities.Inhumanbeingalsosuchabnormalitiesaredemonstrateddepending onthedoseofradiation.
7.Fisheries
Oneofthemainimpactsoftheeffluentfromthereactoristhehotwaterreleaseintothesea.Itisacceptedby theAtomicEnergyCommissionthathotwaterof38degreescentigradewillbereleasedintothesea.Thehigh temperaturewaterwillbeharmfultozooplankton,phytoplanktonandnanoplanktonwhichformsthefoodof thefishes.Inasterileareanofishwillbefound.Hencethehotwaterareawillbehavingadepletedpopulation

60
offishes.FurtherGulfofMannaristheMarineBiosphereextendeduptoKanyakumari.ThelimitoftheGulfof Mannar Biosphere reserve does not stop with the Tuticorin as mentioned by the expert committee report. AnotherproblemwillbetheincreaseofpopulationofJellyfisheswhichdepletefishpopulation.
Henceitcanbestatedthatthereactorswehaveanegativeimpactonthefisheries.Itmaybementionedthat thefisheryresourcesofCaspianseaandtheBlackseaisdepletedbecauseoftheeffluencefromthereactors andindustrialwaste.Thereleaseofradiatedwasteintotheseacannotberuledout.
8.Conservationissues
Impactsofradiationontheconservationofplants&animalsincludingmicroorganismshavebeendealtinthe literatureindetail.Theeffectofradiationislongstandingandthedurationofsuchradiationisalsoverylong. AstheradiationmaypersistforthousandsofyearswecanbesuretheimpactoftheradiationontheBiomass oftheareawillbegreat.StudiesoftheNationalAcademyofScienceUSA,estimatedthatincreasingtoback groundradiationinU.S.Aby100milliremperyearwouldproduce3000to4000additionalcancerdeathsper year and an equal number of nonfatal cancers. Delayed effect of radiation to like cancer occur even at low dosesanddoserate.Thereisnosafedose.
The reprocessing plants produce generally for every 1000 mega wat reactor about 25 cubic meters of intermediate liquid waste (contaminated) between 1000 to 1 million times than maximum permissible dose and1200cubicmetersoflowlevelliquidwaste(10to10000)timesmaximumpermissibledose.Itisdangerous forhumanhealth.TheReactorsaredangeroustothewellbeingofthehealthofhumanbeings.Henceitshould beavoidedastherearealternativetoNuclearreactorsforpower.
61
KOODUNKULAMNUCLEARIMPASSE SUGGESTINGALTERNATIVES/SOLUTIONS
M.G.Devasahayam
INTRODUCTION
TheKoodunkulamNuclearPowerPlant(KKNPP)controversyisragingwithproponentsandopponentsstating their positions and sticking to their stand. Governments stand and local public perception differ sharply. So thereisimpasse,andaseriousoneatthat.Inpublicdomaintruthisnotthetruth,perceptionisthetruth.
Besides,severalindependentexpertshaveexpressedseriousdoubtsandreservationsaboutthesitingofthe plant, quality of construction, radiation dangers, health hazards, fresh water risks, demise of fishing and livelihood, prohibitive decommissioning costs and longterm disposal / management of nuclear wastes. It is imperativethereforetoseriouslylookatalternativesandsolutionstoendtheimpasse.ThisNoteistofacilitate thisprocess.
NUCLEARENERGYDECLINE
Indiassocallednuclearsurgeisamythratherthanreality.In1969,thenuclearestablishmenthadpredicted that by the year 2000, there would be 43,500 MW of nuclear generating capacity. But as of 2011 the total capacityisonly4780MWandasondateRenewableenergyaccountsfor11%ofthetotalpowergenerationof 170 GW (1 GW=1000 MW) installed in India as against the measly 3% from nuclear energy, despite far less patronageandbudgetallocation.
Governmentsaspirationtoincreasenuclearpowercapacityfromabout4800MWnowtoabout64,000MW bythe year2032is utopianand impractical,particularlywhennuclearpowerallovertheworldisdeclining. ThiscanbegaugedfromtheofficialfiguresoftheInternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA),anorganization knownforpromotingnuclearenergy.Accordingtothesefigures,therewasonly1nuclearpowerreactorinthe worldin1955,15reactorsin1960,84reactorsin1970,245reactorsin1980and416reactorsin1990.Hence tillthistimetherewasahugeincreaseinthenumberofreactorsandnuclearindustrywasonanascendance. However,afterlate1980swhentheChernobylaccidentoccurred,mostofthedevelopedcountrieshavenot installedanynewreactor.Therewere435reactorsintheyear2000,upfrom416in1990,andtilltodayin2011 there are 443 reactors. (Source: Writ Petition (Civil) in the Supreme Court by Common Cause and eminent citizens)).
62
In terms of power generation the decline is equally telling. Based on the growth of nuclear energy in the seventies and eighties, it was estimated that in 2000 nuclear fuel will generate 4450 GW electricity. But in actualfactin2010only375GWofelectricitywasproducedfromthissource.Asofnowonly13%ofworlds electricitygenerationisfromnuclearfuel.IAEAestimatesthatthiswillfurtherdeclineto6%in2050!(Source: ResearchpaperbyPasumaiThayagam).ThedeclineisobviousandIndiasnuclearpowersurgeagendaisnot sustainable.
THEALTERNATIVE
1.FuelSwitching
KKNPPhasnotyetgonecriticalandpowergenerationhasnotcommenced.Thereforefuelswitchingispossible from nuclear fuel to coal or gas. This can be done by carrying out certain changes and modifications after mothballingthereactoranditscontainmentbuilding.Forswitchingtocoalnewboilerincludingpulverizedcoal systemandfurnaceneedtobeadded.Ifrequiredsteamturbinesandgeneratorsshouldbemodified.Newcoal unloading, transfer and storage system would be needed. For making the plant pollutionfree clean coal technology equipments should be installed. For switching to LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) new gas turbines, eachhavingitsownheatrecoverysteamgeneratorandstackshouldbeinstalled.ForsupplyofgasanewLNG tanker gas unloading, transfer and storage system need to be installed. If necessary, steam turbines and generatorscouldbemodified.
LetusconsidertheexamplesofUSnuclearpowerstations:
TheShorehamnuclearpowerplantonLongIslandinNewYork,whichhadbeencompleted,wasinthe endconvertedtogenerateelectricityfromnaturalgasandwindpower.In1983,theNewYorkState Assemblypassedaresolutionby15votestoonetotheeffectthatSuffolkCountyonLongIslandcould not be safely evacuated. The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster strengthened opposition from local residents and environmental groups, bringing up to 15,000 people out onto the streets in demonstrations. As a result, the plant was decommissioned in 1989, before commercial operations started. The existing equipment was converted and the plant started generated electricity from naturalgasin2002,withanoutputof100MW.
The second example is the William H Zimmer nuclear power plant in Moscow, Ohio, which was convertedtofuelcombustionwhenitwas97percentcomplete.In1982,theUSNuclearRegulatory Commission found that the plant was poorly constructed, including two instances of defective pipe
63
welds, that industrial safety documents had been forged, and imposed a recordhigh fine of US $200,000besideshaltingconstructionworkontheplant.In1984,discussionswereheldonconverting theplantfromnucleartocoalfiredgeneration.Conversionworkstartedin1987andwascompletedin 1991.Theplantspoweroutputtodayis1,300MW.
Third is the Midland Cogeneration Facility, Michigan. It was originally designed as a nuclear power plant with twin pressurised water reactors. In 1984, the project was terminated at 85 per cent completion after 17 years and $4 billion US dollars investment. Fluor Engineering converted the unfinished plant to a combinedcycle, naturalgasfired cogeneration facility, starting in 1986 and completedin1991atacostof$500million.Thegasturbinesgeneratedanominal1,035MW,andthe steamturbinesaddedapproximately335MW.
FollowingtheFukushimaDaiichinucleardisaster,Taiwanislikelytoadopttheseexamplestoswitch fuelinthetwo1350MWAdvancedBoilingWaterReactorsthatareunderconstructionwiththefirst unitexpectedtobecompletedin2012,andthesecondoneaboutayearafter.Severalothercountries arelikelytofollowsuit.
(Source: Feasibility Study of Converting #4 Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan to a FossilFuel Plant May 10, 2011:JamesKuoP.E(FormerPrincipalEngineer,AmericanElectricPower).
2.0RENEWABLEENERGYINITIATIVES
2.1RepoweringWindfarms
Koodunkulams nearby areas falling in Kanyakumari, Thoothukudy and Tirunelveli Districts have the highest windenergypotentialinthecountrythatincludethefamedwindbeltsofMuppandhal,PanakudiandKayathar thathavelargewindfarmswithinstalledcapacityofabout4000MW.Mostoftheturbinesinstalledareolder than 15 years and some between 1015 years. All theseturbines are submegawatt with low hubheights. If repoweredwithmoderntechnologythesecouldaddabout2000MWcapacityinthenextcoupleofyears. Majorbenefitsofwindenergyrepoweringare:moreefficientuseofpotentialland,morecapacityadditionper unit of land area; more energy generation per unit of land area and per square meter of rotor area with improvedeconomicsandbetterpowergridintegration
64
2.2Solarpower
Theareadescribedabovehasvastbarrenlandsuitableforlargesolarparkssettingupofwhichisapriority activity for the present state government. To start with such a park could be established for 1000 MW of powergenerationcapacity.FindinginvestorswouldnotbeaproblemashasbeenthecaseinGujarat.
2.3Biomasspower
Beingdryandarid,theareaissuitableforlargescale'Energyplantations'andlargecapacityofbiomassbased powerplantscouldbeinstalled.Thiscouldprovidethebaseload.
2.4Tidalenergy
BeingcoastalbeltTidalenergyisanotheroptionwhichshouldbeseriouslylookedinto.
Allthefourwind,solar,biomass,tidalcombinedcanprovidehybridpowerwhichcanbedrawnfor24hours andcombinedwithfuelswitchingofKNPPtherewillbeenoughandmorepowertosatisfytheneedsofTamil Nadu and even export to other states. The whole area can be transformed into a serene and peaceful Renewable Energy Park, like the ones being contemplated by the Government of Tamil Nadu instead of a possiblesiteofnuclearhorror.
Such an Energy Park can promote innovatively applied technologies because such parks provide a meeting point for organizations working with renewable energy solutions, including solar energy, wind power , tidal power,energyefficiency,biofuelsoralternativefuels.EnergyParkcouldalsohouseagriculturealley,where organicfoodsandsustainableagriculturepracticescouldbepromoted.
3.0ENERGYEFFICIENCYANDCONSERVATION.
This is an indigenous and fasttrack alternative to the nuclear obsession. According to Indias Planning Commission:Overthenext25years,EnergyEfficiencyandConservationarethemostimportantvirtualenergy supplysourcesthatIndiapossesses.(ExpertCommitteeonPower2006).Thisisbasedonthefindingsthatkey sectors like agriculture, industry, transport and domestic/commercial have theenergy saving potential of 30, 25,20and20percentagesrespectively.Averageenergysavingpotentialoftheeconomyis24percentandin physical terms this works out to 45,000/50,000 MW, that can be achieved by 2030 in an environmentally sustainableandmuchlowercost!Whyhasthisalternativenoteventhoughtof?
65
UNExpertGrouponEnergyEfficiencyhadputtogetheracompellingdocumentin2007titledRealizingthe Potential of Energy Efficiency. The Report advocated a G8+5 countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico, South Africa)agendafordoublingtheglobalhistoricannualrateofEnergyEfficiencyimprovementto2.5percentper year from 2012 through 2030. If this is implemented, even at 1.5 percent per year India could achieve over 80,000 MW of power generation through saving at a cost of no more than Rs.1,20, 00 crores, which is not evenafractionofwhatIndiaproposestospendonnuclearpower!Buthaveweheardanythingonthis? The massive savings and avoided capacity is very much feasible if the energy intensity of the of the Indian economy,whichisamongthehighestintheworld,issubstantiallyreducedthroughdemandsideandefficiency initiativesandstrictmonitoringofenergyconsumptionandintensityofallsectorsoftheeconomy.Thisistruly a safe, clean, lowcost, fast and indigenous alternative and is on the table. Why then is the obsession with nuclearenergythatlocalpeopledonotwant?
CONCLUSION
This is what the MITHarvard University Report2003 says about nuclear power: The prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challengesinlongtermmanagementofnuclearwastes.(ComparativeMatrixatAnnexure).Thishasnotbeen contradicted and the Oxford Research Group Report2007 in fact endorses this. Search for alternatives is imperative.
CombinationofabovealternativemeasurescouldaugmentTNspowergenerationandsupplyinthenextfew yearsfromwithintheKKNPPenvirons:
2000MWfromKKNPPitselffiredbycoalorgas 2000MWfromRepoweredwindfarms 1000MWfromSolarPark 2000/2500MWofgenerationthroughsavingsfromEEactivities. AdditionalcapacityfromBiomassandTidalwave.
Worldwide,RenewableEnergyistheleaderandnuclearpowerthelaggard.Indiahas150GWofrenewable energypotential,abouthalfintheformofsmallhydropower,biomass,andwindandhalfinsolar,cogeneration, and wastetoenergy. Developing renewable energy and adopting Energy Efficiency measures can help India increaseitsenergysecurity,reducetheadverseimpactsonthelocalenvironment,loweritscarbonintensity,
66
contributetomorebalancedregionaldevelopment,andrealizeitsaspirationsforleadershipinhightechnology industries.TamilNaduispoisedtotakeleadershippositioninthisandthestateshoulddosoinsteadoftowing thenuclearonlyline. WhathavebeenpresentedabovearealternativeproposalstoendtheimpasseandresolvetheKKNPPcrisis. These would however call for detailed deliberations and expert review. But, given the mindset and fear psychosis of the projectaffected population running into several lakhs and adverse views expressed by independent scientists, there is no escape from seriously considering these alternatives to arrive at an abidingsolution.
ANNEXURE
LARGESCALEPOWERGENERATION:COMPARATIVEMATRIX
{Basic Source: Annual Energy Outlook 2011. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U.S. DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)}
A. NonFossilFuel
Thepowerstationsconsideredarelargestandaloneoperationsthatgenerallysupplypowertoadistribution gridasistheKKNPP.
CapacityFactor/ Cost2016(US CentsKwh)
Fuel
Pros
Cons
Remarks
Biomass (including firewood)
Usesarenewable fuel. Nonetadditionof carbontothe atmosphere *Compact;alarge amountof electricalpower frommoderate sizedstation. *Lowfuelcost. *Normallydoes notproduceany significant atmospheric pollutants.
Largeandareaof landperMWof powergenerated. Burnsorganicmatter usefulsoil improvement *Substantial amountsofcooling water. *Expensiveincapital costs,maintenance costs,andlonglead timeinplanningand construction; *Processtoproduce thefuelisthesame asinfissilematerial
83/11.25 (Rs.5.62)
90/11.4 (Rs.5.70) Note:Realistically consideringthe impactofcost overruns,full insurancecost, removalofsubsidy, costofcapitaland
Advanced Nuclear
Emotionalfearof nuclearradiation. AcuteRisk About99.3%ofmined naturaluraniumisin theformofU238 whichcannotbeused asafuelinasimple nuclearpowerstation. Touse0.7%ofthe uraniumanddumpthe
67
forbombs. *Largeamountsof fossilfuelsusedin mining/processing theuraniumfuel releasesGHG *Radiationrelease, eitherfromthe reactorsorfromthe waste. *Accidentsfew,but consequencesvery serious. *Decommissioningat endusefullifevery difficult&very expensive. *Safelongterm disposalofnuclear wasteisdifficult. *Leadtimetobuilda nuclearpower stationis10/15 years. *Atemptingtarget forterroristattack. *WartimeNuclear powerstations wouldproducea hugeamountof radioactive contaminationif bombed.
Decommissioning costs,thecostof Nuclearpowerper Kwh(unit)wouldat leastbedoubleof theoneworkedout abovei.e.23US cents(overRs. 11.50),whichisthe highestamongall othermodesexcept SolarThermal.
remainder,asis currentlydone,is terriblywastefuland risky. Costoverrun: Recentlybuiltplants incurringhugecost overruns. PostFukushima designswouldmakeit costlier. Insurance:Indemnity fromfullthirdparty insuranceliabilitiesno longeravailable. Limitedinsurancedoes notcoverthefullcost ofmajoraccidents.Full insuranceagainst nucleardisasterswould increasethepriceby $0.20to$3.40/kWh. Subsidy US:Direct$115 billionandindirect $145billioninthe US UK:equalUS$543 million,Germany US$845million." IndiaHuge. Nuclearfissiongetsits energyfrombreaking apartofverylarge atomicnuclei,andis destructive. Decommissioningcosts anddangersarehuge andunsustainable Highlypotentialin areaswithclearskies. TNissuch Technologyyetto provecostcompetitive onlargeindustrial scale. Solarpowerismost effectivelybuiltonflat land.
Solarthermal
Sustainable,non polluting Heatcanbestored andusedto generateelectricity whenthesunis notshining.This givessolarthermal anadvantageover windwhichcan onlygenerate electricitywhenit
Solarenergyis spreadrelatively thin.Needslarge landarea. Expensivemachinery tokeeppanels pointedinSuns direction. Asofnowis expensive,US$0.20 to$0.28/kWh.
18/31.2 (Rs.15.60) Note:Asthe capacityfactor increasesfromalow 18%,costofthis powerwould substantiallycome down.R&Dforthisis ongoing.
68
isblowing. Sustainable,non polluting Awellproven technologyand lowpricedfora sustainableenergy SME Requireslittle water,nocooling water. Reducesthe exposureofan economytofuel pricevolatility. Veryresistantto damagefrom earthquakesand tsunamis. WartimeThe scatteredlayoutof turbinesmakeit difficulttodestroy morethanafewat anytime
Wind,large turbines
Doesnotproduce powerwhenthe windisn'tblowing.If alargeproportionof apowersystem's electricityiswind powerthenthere willbeaneedfora correspondingly largebackuppower supply. Togeneratelarge amountsof electricitywind turbinesmustbe numerousand spreadoverlarge areas..
34/9.7 (Rs.4.85)
B. FossilFuel Highwater requirement. Producesmore carbondioxide Coalmininghas adverse environmental effects. Problemsinash 85/9.5to13.6 disposal (Rs.4.70to6.75) WartimeFor maximum efficiencycoal firedpower stationsmustbe big.Theytherefore presenta desirabletarget forenemyattack. Consideringland requiredfor miningand disposalofash coaldoesnothave anyspace advantageover several sustainable methods. Allcoalfired powerstationsare dirty Carbondioxide Canbe sequesteredso thatitisnot releasedintothe atmospherefora longtime.
Coal
Lowcost Goodavailability
69
Naturalgas
Lowcost Generatorsare verycompact ProduceslessCO2 thanoilandcoal Requiresmuch lesswaterthan coalfiredpower stations
ProducesCO2, whichisan importantGHG. Butminimal. Theworld's naturalgas reservesare limited,butnotas limitedasoil reserves.
87/6.6to8.9 (Rs.3.30to4,45)
Duetolargescale usepricescould riseandmakeit uneconomical.
i ii
AERB, clearance letter dated 10 November 1989 National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) , 2003, EIA for KKNPP 1 and 2 Reactors, p 2-45 National Environmental Engineering Research Institute Chapter 3: Baseline Status and Impact Statement page 3.47 3.3.2.1
iii
iv Krishnamurthy et al Interim Report Of Task Force On Safety Evaluation Of The Systems Of KKNPP Post Fukushima Event, 21 May 2011 v
Presentation to Tamilnadu Government nominees and the people (sic) representatives regarding safety of KKNPP on 18-11-2011 in the office of the District Collector, Tirunelveli by Expert Group on KKNPP constituted by the Government of India, 18 Nov 2011 Rajeev Deshpande, Indian N-plants step up safety measures, Times of India TNN | Oct 19, 2011.
vi
vii
VT Padmanabhan, 2011, Space weather anomalies and nuclear safety. Paper presented at the National Seminar on Nuclear Safety at Kuvempu University on 10 Nov 2011. More safety features at KNPP soon New Delhi. Deccan Herald, Nov 11, 3011, DHNS:
viii
70

PMANE Expert Committee Report Dec 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PMANE Expert Committee Report Dec 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT OF THE

PART IV: SAFER

SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVES AND FUEL SWITCHING AND

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

VOLCANISM, TSUNAMI, KARST AND SHORE STABILITY

Thesiteselectionandevaluationcommitteeshaveignoredthepresenceofthesubvolcanicintrusivesandthe possibilityofhavingsmallvolumevolcaniceruptionsatthesiteitself.Thisnegligencemightprovecostlyinthe future.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

AERB, clearance letter dated 10 November 1989

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Facilitiesengineered at site shouldmeetthe requirementseven intheeventofpossibledisruption of pipedwatersupplyfromPechiparaiDam.

Groundwatersourcesinthesiteareashouldbesurveyedanddevelopedtoserveasanadditionalback upsourcetomeetthesafetyneedsoftheplantifwatersupplyfromPechiparaidamisinterrupteddue toanycontingency.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

FreshwaterformakeuptotheplantsystemswillbepassedthroughsandfiltersandD.M.plant.For domesticusewithinthetownship,theseawaterwillbepassedthroughreverseosmosisplantandwill betreatedinaconventionalwatertreatmentplantfollowedbychlorination.ThecapacityofROplant wouldbe2x25m3perhour.(1,200m3pd)

AccordingtoPostFukushimaTaskForceReport,thetotalproductionfrom3plantswillbe7,200cub metersaday.iv AccordingtothereportoftheExpertGroupthetotalproductionis7680cubmetersaday.v

Adesalinationplantisacomplicatedmachinewhichhastocleanandsterilizeseawaterabiologicallycomplex medium.Thatmachinecanfailforreasonsotherthangridfailure.Thesecanbewear,tearandcorrosionofits owncomponentsortheattackofthoseknownandunknownlifeformsgroupedasfoulingagents.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

THE MINING ACTIVITIES AT KKNPP SITE

Sep2001 Mar2002 Jul2002 Mar2003 Sep2003

CompletionofFoundationSlab Completionof0.00mSlab Constructionupto+5.4Slab

W.V.M.P.No.67 of 2006 http://indiankanoon.org/doc/912481/

KKNPP Major milestones http://www.npcil.nic.in/main/ConstructionDetail.aspx?ReactorID=77

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

RoutineReleasesfromaVVERReactorInHungaryIn2002Becquerels AndConcentrationInACubicMeterOfAirAt2KmFromStackAnd InTheAirBreathedByAnInfantAndAnAdultInADay

Halflife OneYear OneDay

ConcentrationinAir breathed Infant

5.5days 12.3years 8.3days 5745years Diverse(longlived)

3E+13 4E+12 5E+07 5E+11 1E+13

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

CoreCoolingduringSBO This system hasbeenprovidedtorejectdecayheatof reactorcoretooutside

Thereisfearamongthefisherfolkthatthedischargeof7.2billionlitersofhotwaterintotheseaeveryday fromeveryreactoratKudankulammayincreasethetemperatureofseawateranddestroythefisheries.Toallay thisfear,theCentralGovernmentsExpertGroupsaysthat:1

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

NATURALDISASTERS10+DEATHOR100+ AFFECTEDDURING20TH CENTURY

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

EARTHQUAKES>6.9DURING :18632011 PERYEAR

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

HEALTH EFFECTS OF LOW LEVEL IONIZING RADIATION

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

PartVPrevalenceofCancerinemployeesandtheirspousesinMAPS,TAPSandBARC.Significantlyhigher prevalenceinolderunits(BARCandTAPS)incomparisontoMAPS.Datasource:NPCIL.Summaryofapaper submittedforpublication.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

5. Ionizingradiation,consanguinity,andnearnessofbirthplaceofthespouseareriskfactorsforthedeathof offspringandforanomalies.Thehigherriskamongthenonmigrantcouplesmaybeduetogeographic inbreeding.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

PART - IV HIGHER PROPORTION OF MALE IN CHILDREN OF INDIAN NUCLEAR WORKERS

Foranalysis, thechildrenhavebeenplacedinfourgroupsonthebasisofyearofbirthinBARCandpaternal exposurestatusinTAPSas:(a)bornduring195585inBARC,(b)bornduring198694inBARC,(c)childrenof RWofTAPSand(d)childrenofNRWofTAPS.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

15.0 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM05 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM40 10.0 Prevalence(Percentage)inKM400

0.0 1519 2029 3039 4049 50+ AllAges

PercentPrevalence KM06 PercentPrevalence KM40 PercentPrevalence KM400

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

WehaveanalyzedtheASPIREdatausingtheStatcalcfeatureofEPI6softwaredevelopedbytheWorldHealth OrganizationandtheCenterforDiseaseControl,Atlanta.Differencebetweenproximateanddistantvillagesis significantinthecaseoftendiseases.Detailsaregivenintablebelow:

Ratioin Square Near

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

A NOTE ON ATOMIC ENERGY IN INDIA

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

AccordingtoRasmussenreport(USA)nearly3300deathareportedduring1yearonaestimatedpopulationof 10millionpeople.TheU.SEnvironmentalProtectionagencystateitisalowestimate.Therearemanystudiesto statethatcancerdeathinUSAis3peopleper10,000annually.

Henceitcanbestatedthatthereactorswehaveanegativeimpactonthefisheries.Itmaybementionedthat thefisheryresourcesofCaspianseaandtheBlackseaisdepletedbecauseoftheeffluencefromthereactors andindustrialwaste.Thereleaseofradiatedwasteintotheseacannotberuledout.

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee

Report of the P-MANE Expert Committee