Thu Sep 27, 2012, 08:57 PM

bananas (20,132 posts)

Kudankulam Nuclear Plant can be stopped if safety concerns are not met, says Supreme Court

Source: The Economic Times

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant could face decommissioning if safety concerns of the local people are not met. The remark was greeted with cautious optimism by groups protesting at the plant, who nevertheless stuck to their plans to lay siege to it on October 8.

Hearing arguments of advocate Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the protesting organizations like the People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy, the court said, "it is a serious matter and we are taking it seriously. Everyone is concerned with the safety of the people around the plant. If we are not satisfied with the safety, we can stop it."

Bhushan had claimed many changes had been made in the Kudankulam plant since 1989, when environmental clearance was last given.

On August 31, the Madras HC had allowed the Nuclear Power Corporation of India to load fuel in the plant's first reactor. At that time, activists opposing the commissioning of the plant challenged the order in SC.

<snip>

Read more: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/kudankulam-nuclear-plant-can-be-stopped-if-safety-concerns-are-not-met-says-supreme-court/articleshow/16581989.cms

India should start phasing out nuclear energy, like Germany, France, and Japan.

12 replies, 1808 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

12 replies	Author	Time	Post
Kudankulam Nuclear Plant can be stopped if safety concerns are not met, says Supreme Court (Original post)	bananas	Sep 2012	OP
India shouldn't stop construction of nuclear power plants.	cosmicone	Sep 2012	#1
What...............	SILVER__FOX52	Sep 2012	#3
I recommend logic rather than emotion.	cosmicone	Sep 2012	#4
wrong, 3 Mile Isl. now is known to be a meltdown + there have been many, many "near misses." See:	wordpix	Sep 2012	#5
I am not advocating it for the US.	cosmicone	Sep 2012	#7
Nuclear is much more expensive than oil and gas and wind.	bananas	Sep 2012	#9
Not in India	cosmicone	Sep 2012	#10
Wind is already cheaper than coal in parts of India	bananas	Sep 2012	#11
If you think you can run	cosmicone	Sep 2012	#12
Nuclear is one of the most expensive energy sources - it's "cake", not bread	bananas	Sep 2012	#8
K&R. So glad to hear it can be stopped!	Overseas	Sep 2012	#2
"India should start phasing out nuclear energy, like Germany, France, and Japan."	greiner3	Sep 2012	#6

Response to bananas (Original post)

Thu Sep 27, 2012, 09:17 PM

cosmicone (3,368 posts)

1. India shouldn't stop construction of nuclear power plants.

India cannot afford to supply electricity from expensive natural gas and oil. Coal is indigenous but pollutes badly.

Nuclear power plants are not ideal but they are a path to prosperity for hundreds of millions mired in poverty and disease. For affluent nations like Germany, France and Japan, it is a relatively easy decision -- just eat cake if there is no bread.

Reply to this post

Response to cosmicone (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 02:27 AM

SILVER__FOX52 (535 posts)

3. What...............

" Can not afford the costs "..............are you kidding ???........try calculating the cost of an extreme nuclear accident, which, statistically will happen. What's that cost now...........you joke !!

Reply to this post

Response to SILVER__FOX52 (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 03:31 AM

cosmicone (3,368 posts)

4. I recommend logic rather than emotion.

At the end of 2011, there were 435 nuclear power plants worldwide with a combined operating history of 14,892 years. There have been only TWO major accidents -- Chernobyl which was due to operator error and Fukushima because of a once in a lifetime tsunami. The former can be handled with better automation, better training of operators and fewer hours (like air traffic controllers) and the latter by choosing sites and engineering that would protect the plants from natural disasters.

Reply to this post

Response to cosmicone (Reply #4)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 07:45 AM

wordpix (12,478 posts)

5. wrong, 3 Mile Isl. now is known to be a meltdown + there have been many, many "near misses." See:

The Case Against the Nuclear Renaissance for the long list.

And BTW, if nuclear is so safe and cheap, why aren't investors investing in new ones? They are asking US for BILLION$ (several billions for each new plant) in guaranteed loans. In addition, each plant is only insured for $350 million for an accident so if a Chernobyl or Fuku accident were to occur in the US, taxpayers are on the hook to pay for the billions in cleanup (if it can be done).

This industry needs to be shut down.

Reply to this post

Response to wordpix (Reply #5)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 11:10 AM

cosmicone (3,368 posts)

7. I am not advocating it for the US.

I am advocating it for India where electricity makes a difference between having a job vs starvation. Indian markets cannot afford oil-fired or CNG/LNG-fired power plants. No power = no manufacturing job growth, no manufacturing jobs = starvation and poverty.

Reply to this post

Response to cosmicone (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 11:23 AM

bananas (20,132 posts)

9. Nuclear is much more expensive than oil and gas and wind.

And solar will be cheaper than nuclear almost everywhere in a few years.

Reply to this post

Response to bananas (Reply #9)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 08:09 PM

cosmicone (3,368 posts)

10. Not in India

India builds its own nuclear power plants with very few imported components and the costs are far far less than comparable European or American plants.

Reply to this post

Response to cosmicone (Reply #10)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 09:42 PM

bananas (20,132 posts)

11. Wind is already cheaper than coal in parts of India

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-18/ge-turbines-help-greenko-drive-wind-power-cost-below-coal

GE Turbines Help Greenko Drive Wind Power Cost Below Coal
By Natalie Obiko Pearson on July 18, 2012

The cost of wind power has dropped below the price of coal-fired energy in parts of India for the first time as improved turbine technology and rising fossil-fuel prices boost its competitiveness, Greenko Group Plc (GKO) said.

“Today we’re able to supply energy below the cost of conventional power,” said Mahesh Kolli, president of Greenko, which is building wind projects with General Electric Co. (GE) in India. “That’s the key development for this year.”

The cost of wind has closed in on coal thanks to more advanced turbines, which can produce more electricity from lower wind speeds. The shift means new wind farms in India will be able to survive without state subsidies, potentially attracting investors to a country where 57 percent of installed capacity is coal-based and 31 percent renewable, including hydropower.

Greenko began operating its first wind project in Ratnagiri in Maharashtra state this year using 1.6-megawatt GE turbines designed for low winds. That farm is “achieving efficiencies never before seen in India,” with a 30 percent plant load factor, Kolli said today by telephone. That’s a measure of a site’s actual generation compared with its theoretical capacity.

<snip>

Reply to this post

Response to bananas (Reply #11)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 11:34 PM

cosmicone (3,368 posts)

12. If you think you can run

a country the size of India on wind and solar alone, you would be wrong.

Secondly, I am not favoring nuclear in lieu of wind/solar/geothermal but in addition to it.

The power needs of India with a billion people are astronomical as all rural areas get TVs, microwaves and computers. Without lots of power, India is destined to be an agrarian backwards country.

Reply to this post

Response to cosmicone (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 11:22 AM

bananas (20,132 posts)

8. Nuclear is one of the most expensive energy sources - it's "cake", not bread

The reason fossil fuels are used so much is because they've been the cheapest.
But they are getting more expensive.

Renewables keep getting cheaper as technology improves and manufacturing scales up.
Wind is roughly competitive with natural gas now.
In some areas solar is cheaper than fossil fuel.
This decade, solar will become competitive with fossil fuels almost everywhere.

Nuclear fission will remain extremely expensive.
It's possible that fusion will be cost-competitive, but it's still decades away.

Reply to this post

Response to bananas (Original post)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 01:38 AM

Overseas (10,855 posts)

2. K&R. So glad to hear it can be stopped!

Last edited Fri Sep 28, 2012, 01:42 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

If safety concerns are not met.

There's a lot of sun in India.

There's a lot of mass transit could be more.

There are lots of brilliant engineers there too.

Reply to this post

Response to bananas (Original post)

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 11:03 AM

greiner3 (3,955 posts)

6. "India should start phasing out nuclear energy, like Germany, France, and Japan."

AS SHOULD THE US!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Latest Breaking News (Forum)