Safety

…the possibility, however remote it may be, of human error, systems failure, sabotage, earthquake and terrorist attacks leading to the release of radioactive matter in the public domain, cannot be entirely ruled out.

 

Guidelines on Management of Nuclear and Radiological Emergencies

National Disaster Management Authority

Govt of India

All nuclear power plants are inherently dangerous.  They are vulnerable to any combination of natural disaster, human error or design failure.  In India, institutional faults make that risk a little bit greater.  Yet these dangers are routinely and emphatically downplayed by the nuclear establishment.

There’s a myth propagated that nuclear power has become safer in recent years.  It’s now toted as the answer to climate change – an “environmentally-friendly” option that guides us away from the looming crisis of peak oil.  The truth is that even a significant increase in nuclear power would only lead to a negligible CO2 reduction 1, and that nuclear reactors are no safer than they were in the 20th Century.  If anything, as they become more powerful, the possible consequences of an accident become even more terrible.

Mistakes do happen.  The nuclear sector is replete with chilling stories of incidents, accidents and near misses.  There’s a story or more for every day of the year - all 365 of them.2 Accidents happened before Chernobyl.  They happened after Chernobyl.  Only the explanations and excuses get tailored anew each time.  The industry is known to have manipulated safety and inspection data, in certain cases, in order to avoid costly repairs and lengthy shutdowns.3 The secrecy that blankets the Indian nuclear power sector shields it further.

Yet even under normal operations nuclear power plants regularly discharge radioactive materials into the air and water.  Nuclear waste, the deadly by-product of nuclear power for which there is no real long-term solution, remains radioactive for generations.

Proponents of nuclear power want it discussed and evaluated on the same factors as other methods of power generation.   This can only be done if the risk factor is set aside altogether as being irrelevant, if the horrific, long-lasting consequences of an accident on huge populations is considered an acceptable price to pay. At Greenpeace, we don’t think it is.

Alternative power sources exist, such as solar, wind or micro-hydro energy.  They can be combined with energy efficiency to deliver India’s electricity needs, fast.  They won’t exacerbate climate change like fossil fuels, and nor do they leave a radioactive legacy or carry the unacceptable risk of a radiological accident, like nuclear energy.  India needs to stop gambling with the health of our children and our land by investing in nuclear power.



Sources
1 Energy Technology Perspectives 2010, IEA/OECD, June 2010
2 http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/nuclearaccidentscalendar/
3 “Complacency, negligence threaten nuclear industry, WANO warns". Nucleonics Week, vol. 44/ Issue 42, Oct. 16,2003

The latest updates

 

My Journey so far with Greenpeace as a Volunteer

Blog entry by Debu Nayak | November 26, 2014

First of all, I sincerely would like to dedicate this to my parents and family who have been a constant source of my energy and motivation. My involvement with Greenpeace was not an accident but purely purposeful. Initially, through...

Fishermen left marooned - Hudhud Aftermath

Blog entry by Aishwarya Madineni | November 11, 2014

As we drove along the east coast off the Visakhapatanam main roads to reach the fishermen’s villages in Bheemilipatanam, the second town to have municipality in the country after Chennai, Srilakshmi, a community worker from the...

Activists slam Ministry of Home Affairs for targeting NGOs

Feature story | November 7, 2014 at 16:30

Civil society leaders today joined Greenpeace India to call on the Ministry of Home Affairs for targeting NGOs. Activists demanded that the government respects NGO’s right to dissent.

Letter to Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate Change

Publication | November 7, 2014 at 16:30

With the next round of IPCC negotiations upon us, Greenpeace would like to congratulate the government on indicating the seriousness it accords to the climate change issue by renaming the Ministry as to include 'Climate Change' and on your call...

Letter to Ministry of Home Affairs

Publication | November 7, 2014 at 16:30

We write to you concerning recent statements by the Ministry of Home Affairs in the Delhi High Court (Greenpeace India Society vs Union of India, WP(C) 5749 of 2014). The MHA has stated in its affidavit dated October 9, 2014 that Greenpeace India...

Climate change washes off Hudhud in India

Blog entry by Aishwarya Madineni | November 6, 2014

On the 12 th of October 2014, the city of Visakhapatanam along with its neighbouring coastal villages in the district witnessed a climate catastrophe of an unimaginable scale . Cyclone Hudhud with wind speeds close to 220kmph...

Sustaining with solar

Blog entry by Anand Prabu Pathanjali | November 3, 2014

Sustaining with solar Environmental conservation and protection are the foundation stones of environmentalists and environmental organizations. Preaching and practicing measures that will uphold these beliefs are a day-to-day...

Why is the IPCC report vital for India?

Blog entry by Greenpeace editorial staff | November 3, 2014

Q & A with Navroz Dubash by Kaisa Kosonen, Campaigner, Climate & Energy, Greenpeace Nordic What’s in the new climate report for India? How bad is climate change by now? How bad could it get in the future? What can we do about...

Global Maize Contamination Report

Publication | October 29, 2014 at 12:18

Genetically modified crops were first commercially grown on a wide scale in 1996. But, there has always been concern about their effects on both health and the environment. A specific concern has been that once released, it would not be possible...

10 simple reasons to say No to GM Maize Field Trials

Blog entry by Manvendra Singh Inaniya | October 29, 2014

10 simple reasons to say No to GM Maize Field Trials 1. Inadequate regulatory mechanism The SBCC ( State Biotechnology Coordination Committee)  and DLC (District Level Committee) required by the law to monitor these field...

11 - 20 of 3709 results.