Skip to main content

SMRs: Niti Aayog's new recipe for 'pushing' communities to nuclear radiation risk

Countereview Desk 

Taking strong exception to the Niti Aayog advocating small modular reactors (SMRs), supposed to be advanced nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of up to 300 MW(e) per unit, which is about one-third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear power reactors, Shankar Sharma, India’s top power and climate policy analyst, has said, it is suggests the “irrationality” the Government of India’s top policy-making body.
In a representation to the chairman, Niti Aayog, who happens to be Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with copies to vice chairman and members, Niti Aayog, and members of the Union Cabinet, Sharma says, not only it to premature to talk of SMRs, as they may take “about a decade before first SRM can come out, there are already major challenges to the claims of the low-carbon emission claims with regard to nuclear power technology.
He insists, “The enormity of the challenges to deploy an adequate number of nuclear power reactors all over the planet in the next 10-20 years to make any substantial impact on climate change.”

Text:

May I draw your kind attention to a recent statement made by Dr VK Saraswat, member, NITI Aayog, advocating the widespread usage of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) in India as in the news link below?
Assuming that this advocacy on SMRs by Dr VK Saraswat is also endorsed by NITI Aayog, and the Union government, many serious concerns on the very associated policy in the energy sector need serious introspection by the Union government.
The news report does not provide any indication that this advocacy has diligently considered various associated issues; especially with regard to Indian energy/ electricity scenario. Even from the perspective of many concerns in the global technological scenario, the concept of SMRs can be said to be far from a well-accepted technology.
An article, as in another news link above, by Dr MV Ramana, who is an expert on nuclear physics, and an author of “The Power of Promise: Examining Nuclear Energy in India”, has listed very many associated issues of serious concerns, not only to the global energy scenario, but also in particular to India in a larger welfare context.
Dr Saraswat is also noted to have stated: "As far as power generation is concerned, we are better off. We have solar power, which is almost the cheapest in the world... And the cost of setting up a solar plant has come down".
In the context of these two sub-statements, it is sad that SMRs, which are associated with a lot more costs and risks to our communities, are being advocated without the help of any due diligence.
The highly credible analysis of the very concept of SMRs by Dr MV Ramana, as in the article above, shows how various government agencies around the world get carried away by the unsubstantiated and tall claims by nuclear power advocates.
Some of the major concerns/ incongruities of SMRs w.r.t Indian scenario can be listed as below:
  1. Whereas, of the 22 nuclear reactors in operation in the country, only four are of the designed capacity above 220 MW, SMRs are touted to be very useful in “small size of about 300 MW”. It is a moot point as to how SMRs will be any better than that of the 220 MW capacity reactors. It can also be termed as a serious dichotomy in the associated policies (or absence of any such policies) that at the same time the country seems to have consciously moved away from smaller size nuclear reactors, such as 220 MW and 540 MW designs; and has announced plans for 700 MW, 1,000 MW and 1,650 MW capacity reactors. If 300 MW capacity SMRs are to be the future for the country, does it mean that all the designs of BWRs, PHWRs, VVERs, EPRs, AP1000s will have no place in the future? Does it mean the proposal for 6*1,650 MWe nuclear power plant at Jaitapur, Maharastra will not go ahead? Since, the economy of size and multiple reactors in a single site were quoted as the basis for the so-called economic decision-making w.r.t to higher capacity units and sizes in all the operational projects, the advocacy for SMRs can be seen as denunciation of such a policy all these years.
  2. It is reported that an important study produced by nuclear advocates at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology had identified costs, safety, proliferation and waste as the four “unresolved problems” with nuclear power. Dr Ramana says: “Not surprisingly, then, companies trying to sell new reactor designs (SMRs) claim that their product will be cheaper, will produce less -- or no -- radioactive waste, be immune to accidents, and not contribute to nuclear proliferation.” A quick analysis of these concerns should be able to establish that SMRs can do no better as compared to the conventional size nuclear reactors.
  3. Dr Ramana says: “In the 2021 edition of its annual cost report, Lazard, the Wall Street firm, estimated that the levelized cost of electricity from new nuclear plants will be between $131 and $204 per megawatt hour; in contrast, newly constructed utility-scale solar and wind plants produce electricity at somewhere between $26 and $50 per megawatt hour according to Lazard. The gap between nuclear power and renewables is large, and is growing larger. While nuclear costs have increased with time, the levelized cost of electricity for solar and wind have declined rapidly, and this is expected to continue over the coming decades.”
  4. SMRs are credibly projected to cost more than the large size reactors for each unit (megawatt) of generation capacity. They are also expected to generate less electrical energy per MW of designed capacity. This makes electricity from small reactors more expensive.
  5. Dr Ramana says: “Small reactors also cause all of the usual problems: the risk of severe accidents, the production of radioactive waste, and the potential for nuclear weapons proliferation. By their very nature, reactors have fundamental properties that render them hazardous. As a result, all nuclear plants, including SMRs, can undergo accidents that could result in widespread radioactive contamination.”
  6. A strong preference for SMRs shall mean, a lot more places in the country will become nuclear reactor sites, and hence, a vastly greater number of communities will face various risks and costs associated with nuclear radiation. Assuming that smaller reactors may reduce the risk and impact of accidents, even a very small reactor can undergo accidents that result in significant radiation doses to members of the public. It should be emphasised that multiple reactors at a site, even if they are SMRs, can only increase the overall risk that an accident at one unit might either induce accidents at other reactors, or make it harder to take preventive actions at others.
  7. Dr Ramana says: “Claims by SMR proponents about not producing waste are not credible, especially if waste is understood not as one kind of material but a number of different streams.” “As Paul Dorfman from the University of Sussex commented, “compared with existing conventional reactors, SMRs would increase the volume and complexity of the nuclear waste problem”.
  8. On the issue of proliferation, Dr Ramana says: “The proliferation problem is made worse by SMRs in many ways. First, many designs require the use of fuel with higher levels of uranium-235 or plutonium. Second, many SMR designs will produce greater quantities of plutonium per unit of electricity relative to current reactors. Third, in the highly unlikely event that the global market for SMRs is as large as proponents claim, then countries that do not currently possess nuclear technology will acquire some of the technical means to make nuclear weapons.”
  9. It is enormously relevant to India as to what Dr Ramana says in conclusion: “Rather than seeing the writing on the wall, unfortunately, government agencies are wasting money on funding small modular reactor proposals. Worse, they seek to justify such funding by repeating the tall claims made by promoters of these technologies. It would be better for them to focus on proven low-carbon sources of energy such as wind and solar, and technologies that enable these to provide a much larger fraction of our energy needs.”
When we also objectively consider the overall electricity/ energy sector scenario in India, such an advocacy on SMRs can only be viewed as totally irrational, ill-suited, and of unacceptable cost implications to our communities. It may also indicate inadequate understanding of the power sector in India.
Advocacy on SMRs, and on nuclear power, can be seen as myopic, and can also be a poor reflection of the overall governance
As per IAEA, there are about 50 SMR designs and concepts globally. Most of them are in various developmental stages, and some are claimed as being near-term deployable. But media reports indicate that there are claims that an SMR could be “complete as early as 2028”, and also describe an operational date of 2029 as an “aggressive but achievable target”. So, one of the first SMRs may take about a decade before a single unit of electricity can come out of it.
Additionally, the low-carbon emission claims w.r.t to nuclear power technology has been challenged by many experts; especially because of the enormity of the challenges to deploy an adequate number of nuclear power reactors all over the planet in the next 10-20 years to make any substantial impact on Climate Change.
What a journey for the nuclear power industry so far: from the tall claims of ‘endless & cheap even to meter energy’, to never ending claims of innovations (such as Magnox, AGR, PWR, BWR, CANDU, RBMK, gas cooled reactors, fast breeder reactors etc.), to Fusion reactors and Small Modular Reactors etc.; to a large number of cancelled reactors in the US, to cost & time over-runs etc.; but totalling only about 3.8% of the global electricity capacity; and now to the tagline of ‘costliest and riskiest power generation technology’, and associated with concerns on global nuclear terrorism and intergenerational waste management issues.
Hence, the very concept of SMRs, from any perspective of relevance to India, can credibly be termed as irrelevant, to say the least.
There have also been many other serious concerns w.r.t nuclear power policy to every section of our society; especially so to the poor and vulnerable sections in a hugely populous and resource constrained country of ours. These have been highlighted in an email representation addressed to you on 12th September 2019, on the subject “Societal concerns over the Environmental Clearance (EC) accorded for the expansion of Kaiga Nuclear Power Project, Karnataka”. My representation to IEA and IAEA, also on the same topic, has highlighted the enormity of such issues to the global communities in general, and to our own people in particular.
If we take true cognisance of various such concerns from the perspective of long-term welfare of our communities, it should become evidently clear that any advocacy in favour of nuclear power for India, certainly so on SMRs, can only be deemed as unsubstantiated, ill-conceived, sans a diligent analysis of the associated costs and benefits, and sans any effective public consultations, including any rational debate in the Parliament. 
 It can also be said to be a sad reflection on our society’s approach to such critical and strategic issues, that many high-profile individuals and/or those in important official positions are being seen as advocating such disastrous policies without considering the unacceptable costs to our teeming millions.
The fact that there has been no credible Energy Policy for the country, even though a draft National Energy Policy was circulated way back in 2017, should also indicate that NITI Aayog has failed to objectively consider how our electricity/ energy needs can be met during the next 20-30 years; especially in the context of fast looming Climate Emergency. 
 A major consideration for the PMO, Finance Ministry, and NITI Aayog should be the fact that the effective utilisation of massive investments being made in the nuclear power sector to maximise the overall efficiency of the infrastructure in electricity segment, including demand side management and optimal harnessing of renewable energy sources, will lead to benefit multiplier to our society, as compared to additional societal costs and risks to our communities from nuclear power.
Additionally, in the absence of any coherent power policy for the future; because of the high AT&C losses prevailing; and because of frequent changes in some of the associated policies, the advocacy on SMRs in particular, and on nuclear power in general, can be seen as myopic, and can also be a poor reflection of the overall governance in the electricity/ energy sector.
In this larger context, may I request you to mandate NITI Aayog to urgently start due diligence on all the associated policy perspectives and effectively involve the stakeholder groups, while also asking the concerned authorities not to indulge in any such ill-conceived advocacy in public?
If found desirable by you, few people from civil society, who have been working on various associated issues, will feel it a privilege to make effective presentations to NITI Aayog at a time of your convenience.

Comments

TRENDING

Whither Govt of India strategy to reduce import dependence on crude oil, natural gas?

By NS Venkataraman*  India presently imports around 80% of it’s crude oil requirement and around 50% of its natural gas requirements . As the domestic production of crude oil and natural gas are virtually stagnant and the domestic demand is increasing at around 7% per annum, India’s steadily increasing dependence on import of the vital energy source is a matter of high energy security concern. This is particularly so, since the price of crude oil and natural gas are considerably fluctuating / increasing in the global market due to geo political factors, which are beyond the control of India. India has promised to achieve zero emission by the year 2070, which mean that the level of emission has to start declining at slow and steady rate from now onwards. It is now well recognized that global emission is caused largely due to use of coal as fuel and natural gas as fuel and feedstock. While burning of coal as fuel cause emission of global warming carbon dioxide gas and sulphur

'Blatant violation' of law by Central government in making NREGA payments

By Our Representative  In September third week, NREGA workers across the country were mobilised for two day so raise their issues and submit a memorandum to the Prime Minister. Organised the NREGA Sangharsh Morcha (NSM), a collective of groups that work with NREGA labourers across the country, workers from 13 states -- Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal -- carried out Kaam Do Abhiyaan, staging demonstrations and rallies against what they called blatant violation of law by the Central government in making NREGA payments. While NREGA has had very positive impacts, it has lately become fruitless, exploiting labour, even though workers who have put in honest hard work have to wait for their wages endlessly, it was suggested.  In such a situation, there is a need to firm up NREGA implementation and end systematic corruption to ensure that workers get their basic NREGA entit

Fascism on prowl? Religious meet 'deeply pained' at silence of Church, bishops, priests

Counterview Desk  The ‘Forum of Religious for Justice and Peace’which held its 17th National Convention at the Montfort Social Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana from 22 to 24 September 2022 on the theme “Deepening our Identity as Religious: Responding to the Signs of the Times”, has expressed concern “at the deteriorating situation of our nation on every front”, especially stating, “Fascism seems to have come to stay” in India. At the same time, the convention, which took place with the participation of 60 persons from 16 states representing 20 religious congregations, in its unanimously-adopted statement added, “We have reached abysmal depths on every parameter: be it social, economic and political”, underlining, “The poor in India become poorer every day; the rich and powerful continue to profiteer at their expense and amass scandalous amounts of wealth.” Text: We, members (63 women and men Religious, from 16 states representing 20 Congregations) of the Forum of Religious for Justice

Muslim intellectuals met Bhagwat, extra-constitutional authority 'like Sanjay Gandhi'

By Shamsul Islam*  In a significant development a delegation of five Muslim intellectuals namely former chief election commissioner SY Quraishi; former senior bureaucrat Najeeb Jung; former AMU vice-chancellor and Lt Gen (retd) Zameer U Shah; politician-cum-journalist Shahid Siddiqui (presently with RLD); and businessman Saeed Shervani [Samajvadi Party] met RSS Supremo Mohan Bhagwat at RSS Delhi headquarters. The meeting was kept secret for reasons known to the participants and was held in August. According to the Muslim intellectuals the meeting held in “a very cordial” atmosphere continued for 75 minutes whereas time allotted was 30 minutes! In a post-meeting justification of the parleys Quraishi stated that their main concern was “the insecurity being increasingly felt by the Muslim community in the wake of recurring incidents of lynching of innocents, calls by Hindutva hotheads for genocide and the marginalisation of the community in almost every sphere”. This delegation consistin

Why Bose's India Gate statue suggests RSS, BJP need violence-loving ‘Hindu’ Netaji

By Prem Singh*  In a TV channel debate, a BJP spokesperson and anchor shared and served a lie that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's daughter in her letter to the Prime Minister has alleged that the Congress kept devaluing Netaji to further Gandhi's non-violence; because Netaji had taken the path of liberating the country through violence mode by forming the Azad Hind Fauj (INA). They also praised the Bombay Royal Naval Mutiny of 1946 to confirm that the country got its independence through a violent route. I stated that I have read the letter of Netaji's daughter, and there is no such allegation in it. But a lie told in the intoxication of power is bound to be blatant. Netaji's daughter Anita Bose Pfaff, even in the past, has already requested some earlier prime ministers of the country to bring back the mortal remains of her father from Japan to India. In none of the letters she has spoken about devaluation of her father’s role in the freedom movement on the basis of Gandh

'Massive concern for people': Modi seeking to turn India into global manufacturing hub

By Shankar Sharma*  The news item quoting Narendra Modi at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meet, "Want to turn India into a manufacturing hub: PM Modi at SCO Summit" should be of massive concern to our people. One can only continue to be shocked by such policies, which can be termed as ill-conceived to say the least. Without objectively considering the environmental and social impacts on our communities in the medium to long term, such policies will also result in massive economic impacts because a lack of environmental and social perspective cannot be economically attractive either. In order to become the global manufacturing hub, India will have to meet an enormous demand for energy of various kinds, and in order to meet this much energy demand the economy has to manufacture enormous number of appliances/ gadgets/ machineries (to generate and distribute commercial forms of energy such as coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, and renewable energy (RE) sources such as so

Pesticide companies' lobbying 'seriously impairing' basics of governance, regulation

Dr Narasimha Reddy Donthi*  The Indian agricultural sector is grappling with low incomes, shortage of natural resources, increasing pest incidence and low public investments in research and extension. Pest attacks are increasing. Previously unknown pests are attacking crops. Farmers, indebted as they are due to various market mechanisms, are finding it hard to protect their crop investments. Thus, farmers are pushed into the conundrum of pesticide usage by pesticide markets and companies. Pesticide usage in India is increasingly becoming a regulatory problem. Regulation has not been effective in the face of such challenges. Scientific expertise on pesticides is often subsumed in the policy tradeoffs that, in the ultimate scenario, encourage production and marketing of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs). Expert Committee reports, which are recommending withdrawal of certain HHPs, are not being acted upon. Lobbying by pesticide companies has seriously impaired the basics of governance an

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Is coal import dependence of more than 50% by 2047 of any relevance to India?

By Shankar Sharma*  I have read the article " Building Resilience in India’s Power Sector " by N Vedachalam, released by the Observer Research Foundation, with a lot of interest. I expected it to provide few useful recommendations to our authorities in charting out a sustainable pathway to green energy transition much before the climate catastrophe push our communities to the precipice. But I am sorry to say that the overall discussions or the message implied in the article disappointed me. I was expecting the article, coming from an engineer with past experience in the power sector, to discuss the much needed recommendations to put the power sector on a sustainable developmental pathway. But I could notice mostly technical jargon and a lot of statistical information, which may already be available in the public domain.   The article also seems to have simply accepted what some of the official agencies seem to have indicated as inevitable for the power sector in our country;

Government 'fails to take up' Indian migrants' unpaid wages issue with other countries

By Rafeek Ravuther, Chandan Kumar, Dharmendra Kumar*  The migrant workers were one of the most vulnerable sections during the pandemic. India experiences large-scale movement of migrants internally and internationally. After the outbreak of the pandemic, migrant workers continued to face injustice especially in getting wages in expedited manner. In the international context, India, the home of 9 million cross-border temporary labour migrants, carried out the largest repatriation exercise ‘Vande Bharat Mission’. Even though the Indian government addressed the immediate requirement of repatriation, it failed to understand and recognise their post-arrival grievances, like back wages, social protection etc. Recently many workers were deported from the middle- east region. Amidst the establishment of grievance mechanisms such as Consular Services Management System (MADAD) and helplines in Pravasi Bharatiya Sahayata Kendra (PBSK), the unresolved grievances remain high. The number of unresolv