PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER

1. PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER

2. PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER The support or opposition to nuclear power does not have a set trend globally. It varies from country-to-country and depends on the level of development i.e., its per capita consumption, future growth projection and the resources available. In most of the developed countries the consumption level is already very high, future growth has saturated and there is enough scope for optimisation of present level of energy use. Due to above reasons, public opinion for nuclear power has turned against it and the thrust in public awareness is to counter this opinion. This is not so in most of the developing countries and certainly not in India. A few individual speak against nuclear energy in “public”. There is total support of Government for nuclear energy in India.

3. INDIAN SCENARIO • The present energy consumption per capita is very low. • The gap in supply and demand is large • Population growth - expected to reach 1500 million by mid of next millennium. • Future requirements of energy / electricity is very high. • Concerted efforts are on to improve Plant Load Factor, conserve energy, efficient utilisation and reduction of transmission and distribution losses, in a bid to bridge the gap. However, new capacities are required to be added. • India is poorly placed in terms of coal, oil and gas resources. Uranium reserves are modest, but is endowed with a sizable thorium resources. The coal resources are localised. Presently, it is next energy importing country and it forms a sizable part of our meager foreign exchange earning. • As such, all the resources have role to play.

4. INDIAN SCENARIO (Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power) • India urgently needs increase in electricity supply. • Power plants are being set up utilising Thermal (coal, gas, diesel, naptha) hydel and nuclear resources. • There is no specific public opposition or support for any particular resource of power and no public opinion is mobilised against nuclear power in India. • There are few individuals / group which talk in public against nuclear power / larger dams, etc. • Development of nuclear power with indigenous resources is a matter of national pride. • The project affected personnel are ‘concerned’ about their proper rehabilitation and initial opposition is to get satisfactory rehabilitation package. • However, there is public concern about safety, environment, waste management and economics of nuclear power.

5. We have undertaken systematic public awareness programme for following target groups : • General public (particularly surrounding the nuclear establishment) • Students & teachers • Authorities of local, state and central government, public leaders and media • The decision makers • The public awareness activities have included - • Exhibitions throughout the country. • Seminar & workshop • Lectures in different centres • Essay competition on a national level • Tours to our power stations • Extensive publicity to non-power application of nuclear energy - agriculture, health care, water resource management, industry and food preservation.

6. NUCLEAR POWER • RELATED CONCERNS • SAFETY • ENVIRONMENT & NUCLEAR WASTES • ECONOMICS

7. Homo Sapiens appears at 23:59:58 Plant invade land Birth of Planet Earth 24 23 1 22 2 Ancient bedrocks 21 3 Multicellular Organisms 20 4 First Bacterial organisms 19 5 18 6 Modern Cells 17 7 16 Blue-green algae; photosynthesis 8 15 9 14 10 13 12 11 Source : IAEA Bulletin Atmospheric Oxygen The “Cosmic Clock” : 4.5 billion years of the planet Earth compressed into one day

8. Evolution of Life, Humans and Culture (Approximate Dates) Source : IAEA Bulletin

9. ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION BY HUMAN ACTIVITIES IN LAST 2000 YEARS (20TH CENTURY) • Green house effect caused by release of CO2, by burning of fossil fuels and by other gases • Global warming • Hole in Ozone layer • Mobilisation of chemicals in soil, water and atmosphere At present level of population, every second • We loose 1000 tonnes of top soil • We loose 3000 sq. metres of forest • 2000 sq. metres arable land becomes desert • 1000 tonnes of unwanted gases are released

10. Annual Individual Radiation Exposure Human - made Natural

11. Average Lifetime Radiation Exposure Chernobyl Accident Natural Background Chernobyl

12. THE COMPOSITION OF THE TOTAL POPULATION EXPOSURE IN INDIA NATURAL 79.7 % MEDICAL 16.2 % ARTIFICIAL 4.1 % RADIOACTIVE DISCHARGES 0.0003% AIR TRAVEL 0.002% TERRESTRIAL 17.7 % INHALATION 32.1 % MEDICAL 16.2 % INGESTION 14.7 % COSMIC 15.2 % PHOSPHOGYPSUM 3.2% FALLOUT 0.6% MISCELLANEOUS 0.25% PHOSPHATE FERTILIZERS 0.04% OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE 0.006% COAL BASED POWER STATIONS 0.01%

13. EQUIVALENT RISK FACTOR • 650 kms air travel • 100 kma car travel • Three fourth of cigarette smoking • 1.5 mts. of mountain climbing • 20 mts. of life at age 60 • Use of oral contraceptive pills for two & half weeks • Half a bottle of wine or • Exposure to 0.10 mSv of Ionizing radiation, which is half a days occupational exposure at the annual dose equivalent level or living three years in the vicinity of a nuclear power station.

14. RADIATION : A FACT OF LIFE CHEST X - RAY (ONE FILM) 20 - 25 MR DENTAL X-RAY (WHOLE MOUTH) 900 MR BREAST MAMMOGRAPHY (ONE FILM) 1500 MR BARIUM ENEMA, GISERIES 8000 MR HEART CATHETERIZATION 45,000 MR BEFORE BYPASS SURGERY (9 YEAR ALLOW- ANCE FOR A RADIATION WORKER

15. Short Term Fatalities (1970-1992) • a) The total is some 10 times higher if accidents with less than • 5 fatalities are included.

16. Long Term Health Effects Of Chernobyl a) Fifty thyroid cancers (treatable). b) Several thousand thyroid cancers (treatable).

17. Energy Density Comparisons 1 kg Coal 3 kw.h 1 kg Oil 4 kw.h 1 kg Uranium 50000 kw.h (3,500,000 kw.h with closed fuel cycles) Fuel Required for 1000 MWe Plant (annual) Coal 2,600,000 t 2000 train cast of 1300 t each Oil 2,000,000 t 10 super tanker Nuclear 30t 10 m3 of reactor core (Uranium) Land Required for 1000 MWe Plant Fossil Nuclear Site 1-4 km2 Solar (thermal or Photovoltaic) 20-50 km2 (a small city) Wind Field 50-100 km2 Bio Mass Plantation 4000-6000 km2

19. Environmental Impacts • Fossil Fuels • Global climate change • Air quality degradation (coal, oil) • Lake acidification and forest damage (coal, oil) • Toxic waste contamination (coal, ash and slag, abatement residues) • Groundwater contamination • Marine and coastal pollution (oil) • Land disturbance • Large fuel and transport requirements • Resource depletion • Hydroelectric • Population displacement • Land loss and change in use • Ecosystem changes and health effects

20. Environmental Impacts (Contd…) • Loss of biodiversity • Dam failure • Decommissioning • Renewables (Solar, wind, geothermal, biomass) • Air quality degradation (geothermal, biomass) • Extensive land use • Ecosystem changes • Fabrication impact (solar photovoltaic cells) • Noise pollution (wind) • Nuclear (full energy chain) • Severe reactor accident release • Waste repository release

21. Health Effects From Fossil Fuel Releases • Sulphur dioxide (SO2) - respiratory disorders, impaired breathing. • Nitrous oxide (NOx) - respiratory disorders, infections, pulmonary diseases. • Carbon monoxide (CO) - fatal angina, various other effects. • Ozone (O3) - respiratory disorders, impaired breathing, asthma, edema. • Particulate matter (PM10) - various toxic particle (organic matter, carbon, mineral dusts, metal oxides and sulphates and nitrate salts) effects, main mortality factor due to fossil fuels. • Toxic substances, heavy metals - specific substance effects.

22. CO2 EQUIVALENT EMISSION FACTORS OF DIFFERENT ENERGY SOURCES( FULL ENERGY CHAIN; MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM VALUES ) CO2equivalents per kWh electric (gram of CO2) 1400 1290 1234 1200 1000 860 890 800 686 600 460 410 400 279 200 9 11 116 75 30 30 37 4 0 Coal Oil Natural gas Hydro Nuclear Wind Solar PV Biomass Source : IAEA Bulletin

24. Waste Strategies Atmosphere Partial removal to solid waste Toxic pollutants Radioactive waste SO2 NOx CO2 Solid waste Volume reduction Shallow ground disposal Shallow or deep ground disposal Confinement Strategy Dispersion Strategy

25. FUEL REQUIRED AND WASTES FROM COAL FIRED AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OF 500 MWe CAPACITY COAL FIRED PLANT (PER DAY) • Fuel • Coal Required (650 gm/kwh) : 7800 Te / day • Waste • Ash (40 %) : 2900 Te / day • Fly Ash (2 %) : 58 Te / day • Lead (50 ppm), Arsenic (10ppm), Uranium, Natural Thorium, Radium 226 present in ash. • Effluent Gases • CO2 (1144 gms./ kwh) : 13680 Tonnes • SO2 (0.6%) : 47 Tonnes • CO (0.05 Lb/T) : 12 Tonnes • Current practice for disposal of ash sludge is dumping in surface ponds and land-fills. • This waste contains many hazardous substances (e.g. toxic heavy metals) which may leach into surface waters and underground aquifiers.1 of 3

26. NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Fuel Fuel required (24 kg of UO2/ million kwh) : 288 kg Waste Low level wastes : 0.7m3 / day Intermediate level wastes (Spent resins etc.) : 0.05m3 / day High level waste (Reprocessing for Pu & : 0.003m3 * unused Uranium recovery) * Vitrified, to be deposited in deep stable geological formation. Gaseous effluent No toxic or green house gases. Some low level radioactive gases without public health significance. Total radiation dose received is less than 1% of the “Natural background radiation level”. 2 of 3

27. NUCLEARPOWER PLANT • Nuclear wastes are low-level wastes (contaminated clothing, tools, etc.) from operation and maintenance activities of nuclear power plants. • Alpha-bearing or transuranic wastes from fuel fabrication and high-level wastes from reprocessing. • Nuclear wastes are small in volume, in comparison to the wastes from a coal-fired power plant. • Nuclear wastes are treated and disposed off in carefully controlled ways employing multiple engineered barriers to totally isolate them from human and natural environments. • 3 of 3

28. NUCLEAR POWER : CLEANEST SOURCE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN LAND REQUIREMENTS MUCH LESS THAN FOR COAL AND HYDRO PROJECTS OF SAME SIZE. LEAST DISPLACEMENT OF PROJECT AFFECTED PEOPLE & THEIR REHABILITATION. (FOR PLANTS OF 1000 MWe CAPACITIES) NUCLEAR PLANTCOAL - THERMAL PLANT FUEL REQUIRED 70 T OF URANIUM / YEAR FOR 3.5 MILLION TONNES PLF AT 75% ENVIRONMENT NO GREEN HOUSE GASES, 6.5 M.T. OF CO-2 NO ACID-RAIN (GREEN HOUSE GAS) ALSO SO2 AND NOx RADIATION EMIT S ONLY 5 % OF NATURAL ALSO EMITS DUE TO BACKGROUND PRESENCEOF Ra. 226, 228 & K-40.

29. NUCLEAR POWER : CLEANEST SOURCE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN (contd...) NUCLEAR PLANTCOAL - THERMAL PLANTWASTE HIGH LEVEL : 27 T SPENT FUEL 1.2 MILLION Te OF ASH CONTAINING OR ABOUT 3 CU.M. WHEN TOXIC METALS LIKE ARSENIC, REPROCESSED AND VITRIFIED. CADMIUMLEAD AND MERCURY. THEY MAY LEACH INTO WATER RESOURCES. INTERMEDIATE LEVEL : 310 T LOW LEVEL : 460 T LOW LEVEL RADIATION GASES WITHOUT PUBLIC HEALTH SIGNIFICANCE. HIGHLY CONTAINED, PRESERVED & DISPERSED AND NO SURVEILLANCE WITH CONTINUOUS SURVEILLANCE. NO CHANCE OF ITS RELEASE TO ENVIRONMENT.

34. Externality Cost Carbon value generation cost

35. Externality Costs

36. NUCLEAR POWER - GREEN & ECONOMIC SOURCE • Nuclear Power is “Green Power” • No emission of green house and acid rain gases. • Radiation exposure is a tiny fraction of natural background. • Waste generated is many folds (lakh times) less in volume as compared to coal and is technologically manageable. • NPP design addresses all issues pertaining to safety, environment etc related measures are built-in plant and are included in costs. • If similar requirements are specified for coal fired plants and related costs included in plant costs, nuclear power, which has proved to be cost-effective in coal deficient areas, would emerge as clear favourite.