INDIA‎ > ‎2013‎ > ‎02. February 2013‎ > ‎

Kudankulam reactor system to be heated up to maximum

There is widespread belief that nuclear energy is low-cost and low-priced which is only because it is heavily subsidized and tax-exempted. Once these exemptions and subsidies are removed, which sure will be as happened with the other energy forms, its price will sky rocket. The largest nuclear energy producers amassed huge profits from their long-functioning plants but electricity prices did not come down. The energy is there and the profit, but the profit goes to a few hands; the burden of keeping waste becomes that of future generations. Statistics show that the more nuclear energy is produced, the more highly priced it becomes. But, when the more wind energy is produced, the lesser has its price become. It is because nuclear monopolies controls governments unlike renewable energy producers and have a free hand in deciding at what price their product is to be sold even while enjoying subsidies, and at what rate their price is to be raised each year which is about 10 percent now. The question is, without state subsidies, exemptions and concessions, how are nuclear plants viable? In many countries, local communities and local administrations run economically and environmentally viable small renewable energy plants without setting up elaborate grids. They do not dictate their laws or command governments what policies are to be adopted in the energy sector. But that is not the case with nuclear energy sector. Because their plants need huge amounts for construction and they possibly own their distribution grids, they consider governments their slaves, which they actually are, and dictate terms, rules, laws, even while enjoying state concessions. Why should this go on for more years and in more countries? Because there are already established other energy production forms which do not enforce political and economic slavery, why rely on and retain a rich slave master who is unsuitable to the modern-day world? It is irrational and illogical that energy makers function as policy makers also. Power makers delegate their representatives to the policy making body; top government officials in the policy making body joins the energy makers when they retire, which causes these heavy state subsidies, exemptions and concessions to nuclear energy makers. First they work in the government, lobbying for the company; then they work in the company, again lobbying government for the company. Perched in their positions which we mistake for governmental, for the past decades, they have been crying out loud that unless nuclear energy is there, the world will fall into darkness. 15 percent of energy produced in Germany in 2009 came from renewable energy sources. This could be made to 50 percent in the world in 2020 and to 100 percent by 2040. They also have been demanding extension of the life period of their reactors, for they would bring steady profits without further investment, and for, they would be there to defeat move to turn to safe renewable energy sources.

There is an unusual word called National Sacrifice Areas in many uranium extracting countries which means dead areas containing radioactive leftover and debris which cannot be used for any purpose by mankind but has to be kept as a terror to all coming generations, a prick on the conscience of that nation. It was in 1972 that in America, President Richard Nixon first used this word to describe certain vast stretches of land with radioactive contamination which won’t go away for several centuries. To produce one tonne of industrial uranium, generally more than 10,000 tonnes of ore have to be extracted from a mining area because the concentration of uranium in the ore would most often be 0.01 to at the most 0.1 percent. This results in the leaving behind of 10,000s of times of the volume of the actual industry grade production, along with exposed and scattered mountains of rocks of low uranium content. Countries with uranium extraction have many such abominable black deserts which appear nowhere in the maps of those countries. These black holes remain there a death ground for the people even after advocates and apostles of nuclear energy are long dead and gone. To store and guard these debris mountains, huge corporations are soon to appear on this world, the fortune 5000 companies of the future world. Most often, these radioactive debris mountains cannot be kept in those original sites but will have to be moved to other sparable sites which will need billions and billions of pounds. America and Germany have had to spend unbelievable huge amounts for such tasks. The large uranium extraction companies make their fortune and move out. People spend billions more out of public treasury through government for ensuring a false feeling of safety by relocating or guarding this debris. Adolph Hitler was an angel when compared to the proponents of nuclear energy. Supply and demand for uranium in the world does not match. During the past many years, stockpiles of uranium had been growing and, when compared to the number of nuclear plants operating, there were considered to have been existing some surplus. Only 5 years into the 21st century, numerous new power plants were built and the demand exceeded supply which was temporarily met from military reserves. Logically, to cater to the increasing number of power plants, quite a number of uranium mines have to be opened worldwide or new uranium-rich planets and dead stars will have to be discovered and exploited. There is not one unmapped uranium spot in this world. All rich uranium sites were the first to be touched which have all exhausted already. The ones intended to be opened newly will have very low uranium content certainly which only means the quantity and number of radioactive debris mountains and National Sacrifice Areas in the world are going to increase at astronomical rates.

John Ram Rahim Singh

Sir P.S. Ramesh Chandran, Either you are a scientist or have stolen someone's research work. Or perhaps you have got all this after extensive surfing on the net. Though all the matter is technical in nature and in fact I have not read it, but still I feel to give you a thumb up.

P.S.Remesh Chandran. Sacrificing 8,00,000 able-bodied men does not justify the cleaning up of a ruined nuclear plant but that was just what the Soviet Union had to do after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in their country. Do not anyone think that these were the men who perished in that accident; they were the people the Soviet government recruited from nearby states for clean up, technically called ‘liquidators’ by the state, the people doomed to die slowly, attending to the post-accident works in the Chernobyl area. Wind favoured Soviet Union and reduced instant deaths but radiation reached even Bavaria in Germany and 3000 people were affected. 3,50,000 people lost their homes permanently. W.H.O. reported the surety of 50,000 child cancer cases in the future in one province alone. More than 5,000 children died in neighbouring countries as a result of wind and sea water-borne radiation. Taking into account the number of forced abortions and still births also in that region, the total number of child deaths there would not be less than 1,50,000. Still, there are highly paid people in the world, nation heads and scientifically noted figures all, to reiterate through press that nuclear energy is the safest form of energy, and that it is a must for the world. Where shall we hang these abominable creatures, or throw them to the very heart of those reactors? Ukraine, Belarus and Gomel are stooped down without a chance of rising up again in the nearby future, still behind state-provided security, several nation heads in the world are bold enough to declare that there would be no change in their energy policies and that their administrations would be marching on in the nuclear path itself. Think about the money they and their subordinates received from nuclear power lobbies to carry out this official propaganda and also think about how puny the amounts they received against the inconceivably huge sums of money those countries will have to spend on dismantling these plants and for cleaning up after an accident. Is it not safe for the world to take a collection and give them the exact amounts for leaving their thrones, or simply execute them before they sign the death warrant of millions? In the 1950s, when nuclear plants were introduced for the first time, there were few people who opposed this kind of energy but today there are only a few people who support it, all of them nation heads, company owners, committee chairmen or energy engineers. In Japan, their Chamber of Commerce, some Keinendran or something, only supports it. In Germany, the relics of Nazis alone want it to remain. In France, only the great reactor manufacturing companies want it to continue. Even in the so called Dark Africa, dozens of unexpected wise countries each year are turning against nuclear energy. It is not strange that a few national leaders who are noted economists also want nuclear energy to stay; they are sold out party and person.

[In response to news article ‘Kudankulam reactor system to be heated up to maximum’ in Yahoo News on 05 February 2013]