Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER. PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER The support or opposition to nuclear power does not have.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER. PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER The support or opposition to nuclear power does not have."— Presentation transcript:

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) ä India urgently needs increase in electricity supply. ä Power plants are being set up utilising Thermal (coal, gas, diesel, naptha) hydel and nuclear resources. ä 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. ä There are few individuals / group which talk in public against nuclear power / larger dams, etc. ä Development of nuclear power with indigenous resources is a matter of national pride. ä The project affected personnel are ‘concerned’ about their proper rehabilitation and initial opposition is to get satisfactory rehabilitation package. ä 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 : ä General public (particularly surrounding the nuclear establishment) ä Students & teachers ä Authorities of local, state and central government, public leaders and media ä 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 rRELATED CONCERNS ëSAFETY ëENVIRONMENT & NUCLEAR WASTES ëECONOMICS

7 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Homo Sapiens appears at 23:59:58 Birth of Planet Earth Ancient bedrocks First Bacterial organisms Blue-green algae; photosynthesis Atmospheric Oxygen Modern Cells Multicellular Organisms Plant invade land The “Cosmic Clock” : 4.5 billion years of the planet Earth compressed into one day Source : IAEA Bulletin

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

9 ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION BY HUMAN ACTIVITIES IN LAST 2000 YEARS (20TH CENTURY) lGreen house effect caused by release of CO2, by burning of fossil fuels and by other gases lGlobal warming lHole in Ozone layer lMobilisation of chemicals in soil, water and atmosphere At present level of population, every second HWe loose 1000 tonnes of top soil HWe loose 3000 sq. metres of forest H2000 sq. metres arable land becomes desert H1000 tonnes of unwanted gases are released

10 Annual Individual Radiation Exposure Human - madeNatural

11 Chernobyl Chernobyl AccidentNatural Background Average Lifetime Radiation Exposure

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

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, GISERIES8000 MR HEART CATHETERIZATION45,000 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 Coal3 kw.h 1 kg Oil4 kw.h 1 kg Uranium50000 kw.h (3,500,000 kw.h with closed fuel cycles) Fuel Required for 1000 MWe Plant (annual) Coal2,600,000 t2000 train cast of 1300 t each Oil2,000,000 t10 super tanker Nuclear30t10 m 3 of reactor core (Uranium) Land Required for 1000 MWe Plant Fossil Nuclear Site1-4 km 2 Solar (thermal or Photovoltaic)20-50 km 2 (a small city) Wind Field50-100 km 2 Bio Mass Plantation4000-6000 km 2

18

19 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 Environmental Impacts

20  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 Environmental Impacts (Contd…)

21  Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) - respiratory disorders, impaired breathing.  Nitrous oxide (NO x ) - respiratory disorders, infections, pulmonary diseases.  Carbon monoxide (CO) - fatal angina, various other effects.  Ozone (O 3 ) - respiratory disorders, impaired breathing, asthma, edema.  Particulate matter (PM 10 ) - 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. Health Effects From Fossil Fuel Releases

22 CO 2 EQUIVALENT EMISSION FACTORS OF DIFFERENT ENERGY SOURCES ( FULL ENERGY CHAIN; MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM VALUES ) 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 CoalOilNatural gas Hydro NuclearWindSolar PVBiomass 1290 860 686 890 1234 460 410 30 75 279 30 116 37 911 4 CO 2 equivalents per kWh electric (gram of CO 2 ) Source : IAEA Bulletin

23

24 Atmosphere Partial removal to solid waste SO 2 NO x CO 2 Toxic pollutants Solid waste Shallow ground disposal Dispersion Strategy Radioactive waste Volume reduction Confinement Strategy Shallow or deep ground disposal Waste Strategies

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 CO 2 (1144 gms./ kwh) : 13680 Tonnes SO 2 (0.6%) : 47 Tonnes CO (0.05 Lb/T) : 12 Tonnes äCurrent practice for disposal of ash sludge is dumping in surface ponds and land-fills. äThis 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 UO 2 / million kwh) : 288 kg Waste Low level wastes : 0.7m 3 / day Intermediate level wastes (Spent resins etc.) : 0.05m 3 / day High level waste (Reprocessing for Pu & : 0.003m 3 * 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 íNuclear wastes are low-level wastes (contaminated clothing, tools, etc.) from operation and maintenance activities of nuclear power plants. íAlpha-bearing or transuranic wastes from fuel fabrication and high-level wastes from reprocessing. íNuclear wastes are small in volume, in comparison to the wastes from a coal-fired power plant. íNuclear 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 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

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 PLANT COAL - 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 PRESENCE OF Ra. 226, 228 & K-40.

29 NUCLEAR POWER : CLEANEST SOURCE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN (contd...) NUCLEAR PLANT COAL - THERMAL PLANT WASTE 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. CADMIUM LEAD 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.

30

31

32

33

34 Externality Cost Carbon value generation cost

35 Externality Costs

36 NUCLEAR POWER - GREEN & ECONOMIC SOURCE r Nuclear Power is “Green Power” r No emission of green house and acid rain gases. r Radiation exposure is a tiny fraction of natural background. r Waste generated is many folds (lakh times) less in volume as compared to coal and is technologically manageable. r NPP design addresses all issues pertaining to safety, environment etc related measures are built-in plant and are included in costs. r 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.


Download ppt "PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER. PUBLIC & POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER The support or opposition to nuclear power does not have."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google