Carbon capture and storage (CCS)

It is reported that the technology, CCS is of absorbing the greenhouse gas (CHG) CO2 in some matrix at the emission points and store the gas under or on the sea bed instead of discharging in to the atmosphere is an excellent idea from the global warming and climate change considerations. The emission points are the environmental discharge points of the power plants based on fossil fuel. Alternatively, it is reported that the gas can also be stored underground in vacant or disused natural gas fields.

Parallel can be seen in the underground disposal of radioactive wastes. Risk of leakages is similar in both the situations. In an event of any leakage of CO2 in the sea water, there will be a change the sea water acidity (increase) destroying the marine life. Hence, as in the case of radioactive waste, the disposal in the sea bed of the CO2 canisters should be banned internationally. The only alternative will be as in the case of high-level radioactive waste, the well-sealed CO2 canisters can be disposed off in stable and deep geological formations without much risk of any leakages reaching the environment.

Indian nuclear liability bill

The nuclear liability bill, which seeks to cap the liability of foreign nuclear suppliers to a meager amount of Rupees 500 Crore in case of nuclear accidents, is in trouble in the Indian Parliament. Keeping in mind the comprehensive clean-up requirements in case of an accident, the actual liabilities may be over 1000 times more than the amount specified in the bill.

It means if things work out safely, the companies will sell nuclear materials and equipments and make money, and if some thing goes wrong, the Indian tax payers will have to bear the huge cost of cleaning up and take responsibility for the expensive medical management of the exposed population for long period of time.

Now that in the wake of the Bhopal gas tragedy verdict, it is very relevant that appropriate legislation with proper clauses should be in place to allow fastening of unlimited liability on the suppliers and operators of the plants who were responsible for disasters causing large scale area contamination and casualties to large number of persons. The laws should clearly address issues such as proper monetary compensation for the victims, pay for the clean-up of the contaminated areas and ensure installation of fail-safe safety systems to avoid major nuclear accidents.

One affected in “minor” contamination at BARC

Feedback on the news item in the Times of India – Page 2 with a photograph on May 13, 2010

It only shows the ignorance of the media and the public about the radioactivity and radiation. Such a trivial occurrence of contamination inside a lab designed to handle such contaminated materials using appropriate protective measures is not a NEWS item at all to be published in an esteemed news paper like Times of India, unless you have other agenda. Such a precious space should not be wasted on such an insignificant item.

The personnel are well-trained to handle such contaminated materials. Every worker is supposed to monitor himself using the radiation or contamination monitors to ensure that his hands/clothing are not contaminated before he comes out of the laboratory. If he finds some contamination on his person, he has to wash and decontaminate himself.

This is the normal work procedure in any radioactive laboratory. The concerned department should go for a massive education and awareness programmes to sensitize the public with respect to radiation and its benefits.

Protecting Nuclear Facilities against Nature’s Fury

In general, all the nuclear facilities are designed to withstand certain amount (?) of natural events such as earthquake, floods, rains, etc. Therefore, there has been a misconception since the early days that human error and mechanical failure are the major variables with higher risk of radiological releases to the environment. Nuclear power plants all over the world are exposed to natural hazards, such as hurricanes, floods, fires, tsunamis, volcanoes and earthquakes. The event in one country may cause damages in other neighboring country.

With safety always a key concern, engineers, safety specialists and architects also have to take the extreme natural forces into consideration while designing the plants. Mitigative measures are expected to be in place. When the earthquake hit the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Japan, four reactors shut down automatically. Water containing radioactive material was released into the sea. There was no adverse effect on human health or the environment. It was observed that the structure, systems and components that are important to safety were actually built robust enough to withstand the earthquake. However, it was noted that the plant´s design seismic hazard inputs were underestimated.

Subsequently, the IAEA has revised the existing set of safety standards on site selection and evaluation to analyze the impact of external hazards such as earthquake using the best available and updated knowledge.

There are further questions to be answered by the designers and regulators. The very first question is up to what level of the stated hazard one should accept as adequately safe design? What about the after-effects: such as of earthquake generated tsunami? One such disaster occurred in the Indian Ocean on the morning of Sunday, 26 December 2004. Over 200,000 people were killed. Can nuclear facilities built generally on the sea shores withstand such type of natural fury? How much safety in design? Is there any limit? Can we build economically viable SAFE nuclear facilities?

Nuclear disarmament – aftermath

USA is going full bang on the nuclear disarmament initiative. There was Nuclear Posture Review and Nuclear Security Summit, which concluded recently. President Obama’s stated end goal is nuclear disarmament. As on today, in general, the countries possessing nuclear weapons are responsible countries and there seems to be not much threat from use of nuclear weapons. Threat is from the terror organizations, like Al-Qaeda which must be trying hard to get their hands on the fissile materials for possible nuclear terrorism.

Any disarmament efforts will generate millions of tons of plutonium - 90% above pure fissile material - generated from dismantling of the weapons. Security and safe storage of this material in such a large quantity is a herculean task and calls for financial implications in terms of billions of dollars. The material, even in kilogram quantities, can result in criticality incidents which will release bursts of fission energy and fission products with potential for environmental contamination.

Unless the nuclear weapons States find a way out to safe management of the fissile material and find use in the form of nuclear fuel for power generation, the actual disarmament should not be attempted. In view of the very long half life, thousands of years of Pu-239, just disposal in any form of the fissile material is unsafe and it is economically unsound. Countries have spent billions of dollars to produce such fissile materials.

Any fissile material stored in unsafe way has potential for theft by terror groups. It is wise to design reactors to use/recycle such weapon-grade fissile material for its peaceful applications.

Security of nuclear materials

Security of fissile and radioactive materials is a requirement for global safety and it should be tackled on global basis. India seems to be doing its part in maintaining good record in nuclear security in the diversified use of radioactive substances in the country.

The country is planning to establish a state-of-the-art nuclear energy partnership centre to conduct proliferation resistant research and development in nuclear studies. The national facility will have four different schools to conduct research and development in: advanced nuclear energy system studies, nuclear security, radiation safety and application of radiation and radioisotopes in industry, medicine and agriculture. The R & D products are expected to be intrinsically safe, secure, proliferation resistant and sustainable. It is reported that the centre will be linked to IAEA research facilities.

It is good move provided you have right man power to head such an ambitious program and it should be established in a time-bound manner.

Indian nuclear liability bill

The nuclear liability bill, which seeks to cap the liability of foreign companies to a meager Rs.500 Crore in case of nuclear accidents, is in trouble in the Indian Parliament. The actual liabilities may be over 100 times more than the amount specified in the bill. It means if things works out safely, the companies will sell power and make money, and if some thing goes wrong, the Indian tax payers will have to bear the huge cost of cleaning up and take care of the exposed population for long period of time.

However, It important that the bill is passed with some changes to start nuclear energy business in India by foreign companies.